Trump unveils new tariffs on 92 countries, with Canada hit by 35% levy
The order, which will take effect on August 7, follows days of intense tariff negotiations, as the White House struck last-minute deals with several countries ahead of the president's Friday deadline.
Trump set the Friday deadline after his earlier 'Liberation Day' tariffs in April triggered a stock market slump and stoked fears of a recession. In response, he introduced a 90-day window for negotiations.
But when efforts to secure enough trade deals fell short, he extended the timeline and sent letters to world leaders outlining the proposed tariff rates, a move that sparked a flurry of rushed agreements.
Despite the delays, the new tariffs are expected to strain long-standing global alliances and once again test the world economy.
After initially threatening Lesotho with a 50% tariff, the US has lowered the rate to 15%. Donald Trump unveiled sweeping tariffs on April 2, as part of his so-called 'Liberation Day'. / Credit: AP
Tariffs have been set at 20% for Taiwan and 19% for Pakistan, while goods from Israel, Iceland, Norway, Fiji, Ghana, Guyana, and Ecuador, among others, will face a 15% levy.
Trump's decision to hit Canada with a 35% tariff on certain goods prompted Prime Minister Mark Carney to say on Friday that he is 'disappointed' by the US decision to target products not covered by the existing free trade deal, the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).
The USMCA, negotiated during Trump's first term and implemented in 2020, allows many North American-made products to be traded without tariffs.
Uncertainty has marked Trump's months-long tariff rollout, adding a sense of drama to each announcement.
But one thing has remained consistent: his push to impose import taxes that many economists warn will, at least in part, fall on US consumers and businesses.
'We have made a few deals today that are excellent deals for the country,' Trump told reporters on Thursday afternoon, without detailing the terms of those agreements or the nations involved.
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
19 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
At long last, John Swinney has seen what grown-up politics is about
Mr Swinney and his fellow SNP ministers routinely like to churn out anti-Trump rhetoric seemingly because they think that'll garner them a few votes. But the reality of grown-up politics in which Mr Swinney has been obliged to indulge for just a few hours is that dialogue, pragmatism and diplomacy are key weapons in the armoury of a successful politician, not the kind of puerile sidelines sniping that's characteristic of the [[SNP]]. [[Donald Trump]] isn't my cup of tea either, but let's not forget that he leads the world's largest economy. I'm certain Keir Starmer has multiple reservations about Mr Trump, yet he, unlike Mr Swinney, heads up a sovereign state and has both a domestic and international remit – he can't wallow in Swinney-style futile populist virtue-signalling. Martin Redfern, Melrose. Knocking Labour off course Labour is on the way to running out of road for its long-term ambitions. All the MPs were elected on the same ticket with a destination in view and a driver to steer them in the right direction. They all want to reach the same destination but many of them differ with the driver on how fast they should proceed and what is the best route to reach their goal. It all boils down to how much they trust the driver and whether they can accept his gradualist approach. In today's world it would appear that everyone knows better than the people in charge and would like to impose their opinions on the ones whose skill got them on to the bus of government. In every walk of life you have to tailor your ambitions to fit in with the means at your disposal to hit those heights. Furthermore no one wishes to be compared to reckless teenagers who scream from the back of the bus for the driver to go faster, to take chances or to take a more direct route. Paying attention to excited MPs could lead to totalling the whole project the Government is trying to put in place. Do those MPs really want to jeopardise their chances of a second term in government with their short-sighted perspectives by showing that they cannot see the woods for the trees? Failure to take the global picture into consideration will run their bus off the road with regard to the Government's ambitions to improve the running of the UK for every level of the electorate. There is an old Roman tale about how the different organs and functions of the human body need to work together in harmony to achieve its desired results. It would be well worth the time of Labour MPs to reflect upon that. Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs. Read more letters Why not protest something important? So activists have been dangling themselves off the Forth Road Bridge over another issue which is of marginal, if any, concern to the rest of us ("Police arrest 10 Greenpeace activists after bridge protest", July 27). When have we seen such activists glueing themselves to the highway, roosting on motorway gantries, or dangling from bridges and buildings over anything that matters to the Many? Over out of control immigration? The housing shortage? The cost of living crisis? Lack of opportunities for our young people? The epidemic of stabbings and other lawlessness? The answer, of course, is that the narcissistic Few are completely indifferent to the plight of ordinary people. Whether they perform as Just Stop Oil, Climate Rebellion, Stand Up To Racism, or under whatever name, the extreme demands and their callous disregard for the interests of the Many are always the same. Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife. Such a sad life story Richard Holloway's life story ("The Bishop who abandoned God", July 27) is one of the saddest I have read. He is caught up in an orthodox version of the Christian world, and seemingly missing the most basic and fundamental uniqueness of this faith; put off by tradition and hypocrisy that he encountered in the various stages of his religious career. It strikes me that his experience of religious life is strikingly similar to the religious pomposity of the Pharisees of the 1st century, when Jesus was alive. Their religion was one of rules and regulations, burdensome traditions and rituals that were impossible to follow. They made life so difficult for the layperson, and were 100% convinced they were right. Their superiority and controlling natures led them eventually to crucify Jesus Christ, whom they hated with a vengeance, because he did not fit in with their version of religion. Richard Holloway appears to be very knowledgeable about various religions, yet he clearly has missed the whole theme of the Bible, that God, the Creator, loves his creatures with an unending love, yet seeks truth and justice from his people. A God whose love is so immense that, to deal with the root problem of the human race, "sin", he allowed his one and only Son, Jesus, to die on that cross... taking all the pain and sorrow and evil of the world upon himself. This is, I admit, a profound mystery; yet it is the foundational truth that resonates throughout the whole Bible. This same God does not ask us to "obey rules" or to "follow religious traditions"... He asks us to trust him, and to commit our lives to him... he longs for a relationship with us humans; longs that we speak with him, listen to him, and experience the love, the joy, and the peace that comes with him. Trying, as so many do, like Richard Holloway, to follow Christ's teaching without following Christ, is actually impossible, for his teaching demands impossible standards that only he can help us meet, in the strength he provides. I could go on and on, for Richard Holloway's story is so incredibly sad. He says "religion left me"; but Jesus Christ says, "I came to seek out and to rescue those who are lost in this world" – and that is all of us. He has not yet given up on Richard Holloway, and my earnest prayer is that he will truly find the Lord, who died for him, and who was raised from the dead. Now, that truth makes Jesus unique, and worth following. May God bless Richard Holloway, and all who are yearning for truth, and true fulfilment; these are found in God himself. Alasdair HB Fyfe, Carmunnock. Richard Holloway, former Bishop of Edinburgh (Image: Newsquest) Reasons behind Russia's actions Ronald Cameron (Letters, July 27) says that "Ukraine has come close to destroying the Russian war machine". Mr Cameron has got it the wrong way round. Russia has come close to destroying Ukraine' s army. Ukraine is in the position Germany was in in 1944, fighting losing battles, the war effectively lost, but continuing to lash out with deadly but strategically pointless missile strikes. The writing is on the wall for President Zelenskyy and his gang. Mr Cameron repeats the false claim that Russia is going to invade Nato's eastern border, but the fact is that Russian fears invasion from the West more than we fear them. In 1812 Napoleon burned Moscow. In 1854 Britain and France invaded Crimea. In 1918 Germany invaded Russia and Russia lost one million square miles of territory at the subsequent Treaty of Brest Litovsk. Britain, Canada and the United States invaded Russia between 1918 and 1925. In 1941 German forces were at the gates of Moscow and on their retreat destroyed virtually everything. President Eisenhower, then Supreme Commander Allied Forces in Europe, wrote: "When we flew into Russia, in 1945, I did not see a house standing between the western borders of the country and the area around Moscow." Declassified official documents record that in February 1997 the then Prime Minister John Major said: "If I were Russian I too would be concerned that Nato might move up to Russia's borders." Since then Nato has expanded to 32 countries. Russia warned repeatedly from 2008 that Ukraine's admission to Nato was a red line. The coup of 2014 which brought a nationalist government hostile to Russia to power resulted in a civil war between the eastern Russian-speaking provinces and the Kiev regime, which bombed and shelled them for eight years. Russia invaded in their support and to prevent Nato forces on a border which geographically is difficult to defend. Flying the Ukraine flag is risible. William Loneskie, Lauder. • Ronald Cameron contradicts himself. First he writes that "we" (presumably the UK) must do "everything possible" to support Ukraine, but then "there are plenty of better things to spend the money on". Come on, money can't be spent twice, so which is it to be ? George Morton, Rosyth. Off pat Rab McNeil's excellent article on Dougie MacLean ('Singer made every ex-pat yearn for home … and a pint', July 27) was interesting but its headline ignored the fact that an ex-soldier is someone who used to be a soldier, an ex-teacher is someone who used to be teacher and an ex-pat is someone who used to be a pat. If text space is so scarce that an abbreviation for expatriate is needed, it is expat, no hyphen being involved. Peter Dryburgh, Edinburgh.
Scotsman
36 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Polarising Donald Trump's North Sea comments tapped into growing frustration
It's time to listen to the point made by US president Donald Trump and turn his soundbite on the North Sea into a smart, sober policy, writes Ryan Crighton. Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Donald Trump's shoot-from-the-hip diplomacy was on full display in Aberdeen this week as he waded into the UK's energy debate, calling for lower taxes on North Sea oil and gas operators. The president's remarks – delivered both in person and online to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer – will have raised eyebrows in Westminster. However, in the north-east of Scotland, where redundancies are mounting, his comments tapped into a growing sense of frustration. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad US President Donald Trump on the first tee during the official opening of the New Course, the second championship course at Trump International Golf Links, on the Menie Estate in Balmedie, Aberdeenshire | PA He may be a polarising messenger, but his advocacy for the repeal of the Energy Profits Levy (EPL) aligns with what the data, the workers and the businesses on the ground have been saying for over two years – that the windfall tax is killing off a vital British industry and a crucial national asset. According to data from Offshore Energies UK, 10,000 jobs have already been lost since the levy's introduction by the Conservative government in 2022. Harbour Energy, the UK's largest oil and gas producer, has since laid off 600 people in Aberdeen alone. These aren't abstract statistics — they are highly skilled individuals, families, and communities being sacrificed on the altar of fiscal short-termism. The failure of the north east green freeport bid is a major blow for a regional economy transitioning away from fossil fuels. Picture: Andy Buchanan/Getty Worse still, the economic wreckage isn't even delivering the returns that were promised. Independent analysis from Stifel shows EPL revenues have consistently come in at the low end of government forecasts. Why? Because the supposed "windfall" they are taxing does not exist. Oil prices are down 50 per cent since the peak of the Ukraine crisis. Gas prices have collapsed by 80 per cent. The result is a textbook case of policy failure. Tax hikes intended to boost revenues have instead triggered a collapse in investment, with over £20 billion of planned capital spending now cancelled or paused. Exploration activity has ground to a halt. Fields are being decommissioned prematurely. The UK is forfeiting not just jobs and tax income, but its energy security. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This shouldn't just be of concern to those living and working in Aberdeen - this should alarm everyone, because the UK still needs oil and gas. Even in the most ambitious net-zero scenario, the country will require between 13 and 15 billion barrels of oil equivalent by 2050. Right now, we're on track to produce less than four. And that energy shortfall isn't going to be filled by wind turbines and hydrogen pipelines overnight. The reality is that we are swapping cleaner, domestically produced energy for dirtier, imported alternatives. According to the North Sea Transition Authority, gas extracted in the UK has less than a quarter of the carbon footprint of imported LNG. Yet we are allowing that domestic capacity to decline while increasing our reliance on higher-emission imports from the US and Qatar. It is environmental hypocrisy at its worst. All the while, the UK government continues to claim we are 'maximising value' from our domestic resources. But how? By driving capital offshore? By gutting the supply chain that is also needed to deliver renewables, carbon capture, and green hydrogen? By forcing energy companies to pay tax rates that, in some cases, exceed 100 per cent? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ryan Crighton, policy director at Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce and a senior partner at True North Advisors. | True North Advisors In 2024, Harbour Energy reported a pre-tax profit of £950 million. However, after accounting for an effective tax rate of 108 per cent, the company posted no net profit for the year. This level of taxation is without parallel in the UK economy. It's not just unfair - it's economically suicidal. The UK's approach also compares poorly to our North Sea neighbours in Norway. While their headline tax rate is similar, the Norwegian government supports exploration and shares risk through its fiscal regime. That's why Norway continues to attract investment and why its energy sector is thriving. We, by contrast, have taken the opposite path – penalising production, scaring off capital, and hoping for different results. What's even more galling is that the levy is being used to fund Great British Energy – the new public clean energy company set-up by the Labour Party. According to Stifel, EPL revenues are set to collapse from £5.5bn to under £1bn by 2029. You cannot fund the future of energy by strangling the very sector that underpins it. So yes, President Trump is right to shine a spotlight on this issue. But the solution isn't a populist soundbite or a quick political win. It is a long-overdue dose of energy pragmatism. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad That means abolishing the EPL – now – and restoring a stable, competitive tax regime that can unlock investment, extend production and retain the critical skills base we will need for the next generation of energy infrastructure. It also means rejecting the false binary between fossil fuels and renewables. The future is not oil or wind. It is oil and wind. And hydrogen. And carbon capture. We need all of it. Everything, everywhere, all at once. The UK cannot build a low-carbon future while dismantling the industrial engine required to deliver it. A managed transition must be just that – managed. And that means recognising the continuing role of oil and gas, treating our energy sector with the strategic seriousness it deserves, and stopping the ideological war against the basin that still powers Britain. So, let's take Trump's call and translate it into smart, sober policy. Not because he said it, but because the facts demand it. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The North Sea doesn't need special treatment, but it does deserve fair treatment. The alternative isn't a greener future – it's a weaker Britain.
The Guardian
37 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The US attacks on Iran have backfired horribly – but a path to peace is still possible
Hanging is the preferred method of execution in Iran, although stoning and crucifixion offer alternative options for an ever-vengeful theocracy. Death by hanging is not necessarily quick. Strangulation and suffocation can take several minutes. The UN says more than 600 people have been judicially murdered so far this year. Iran has more executions per capita than any country in the world. Since June's US and Israeli attacks, growing numbers of victims are political dissidents. Fifty days on, nothing remotely positive has resulted from the illegal bombing raids and missile strikes mounted by the US president, Donald Trump, and Israel's leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, despite their boasts of world-changing success. Iran's nuclear facilities were not obliterated, as Trump claimed. Tehran has not abandoned uranium enrichment. The regime did not fall, despite Netanyahu's call for an uprising. If anything, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is more defiant. He has since launched a new crackdown on opponents, hence the executions. Deploring last weekend's hanging of political prisoners Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani, Amnesty International linked their fate to the US-Israeli attacks. Arrested in 2022, the two men were charged with rebellion and 'enmity against God'. They were tortured, forced to sign confessions and sentenced last year after a five-minute trial. The decision to execute them now 'highlights the authorities' ruthless use of the death penalty as a tool of political repression in times of national crisis to crush dissent and spread fear', Amnesty said. Hundreds have been arrested since June in a regime drive to unmask spies and collaborators, real or imagined. Glaring intelligence failures that, for example, allowed Israel to locate and bomb a national security council meeting, injuring Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, are officially blamed not on gross incompetence but supposed fifth columnists. Iran's parliament wants to expand use of capital punishment. Up to 60 political prisoners face execution. This typically harsh reaction by clerical hardliners around Khamenei, and within the judiciary and Revolutionary Guards, comes despite a surge in patriotic sentiment after the attacks, which reportedly killed at least 935 people, mostly civilians, and injured more than 5,000. By intensifying repression, the regime squandered a chance to harness public anger, not least against Britain and European governments that turned a blind eye. US-Israeli actions have had other far-reaching, negative consequences. The attacks breached the UN charter and international law, as the Brics group of 'global south' countries noted. They led Tehran to suspend UN nuclear inspections. They exacerbated US-Europe divisions. And, ironically, they increased the likelihood of Iran building a bomb for self-defence. Iran insists it does not possess and does not want nuclear weapons. For all Israel's vaunted intelligence capabilities, neither Netanyahu nor anyone else has definitively proved otherwise. The decision to attack was based on a guess, driven by fear and hatred. It caused serious physical damage, but did not change mindsets. Iran is adamant it will continue to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. The bombing was a bust. Trump's angry threat to strike again is confirmation of failure. What this reckless act of aggression did do is encourage rogue states such as Russia to believe they, too, may attack other countries with impunity. It reinforces the belief in Iranian ruling circles, and not only among rejectionist factions, that the west cannot be trusted and a closer alliance with China is necessary. It strengthens the hand of hardliners whose fondness for regional proxy warfare, and recently documented covert operations against Britain, has entrenched Iran's pariah status. Historically speaking, Iran was and is an avoidable tragedy – one of the west's worst-ever geostrategic own goals. Unthinking support for the shah helped spur the 1979 revolution. The subsequent, far from inevitable ascendancy of conservative clerics plus abiding, irrational US animosity, feeding off memories of the humiliating Tehran embassy siege, rendered the rift permanent. Europe tried and failed to chart a middle path. In 2018, Trump reneged on the US-, UN- and EU-ratified nuclear deal with Tehran and reimposed sanctions. This last of many disastrous policy mistakes led directly to today's impasse. With wiser heads, it could have been very different. All parties to this conflict should study the French Enlightenment philosopher Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu, a foe to tyranny in all its forms. Writing in his 1721 bestseller Persian Letters more than 300 years ago, he issues an impressively prescient warning about what were then imaginary weapons of mass destruction. 'You say that you are afraid of the discovery of some method of destruction that is crueller than those which are used now,' his fictitious Persian traveller Usbek writes to a friend. 'If such a fateful invention came to be discovered, it would soon be banned by international law. By the unanimous consent of every country the discovery would be buried.' In the sense that nuclear weapons are outlawed, Usbek's optimistic prediction was correct. But not 'every country' complies. If the US and Israel are sincere about preventing Iran acquiring the bomb, they should set an example and reduce, and ultimately eliminate, their nuclear arsenals. They should stop threatening renewed attacks. And they should back talks on a regional nuclear pact, as proposed by Iran's former foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. Only then, perhaps, will Tehran come in from the cold. Only then, perhaps, will its paranoid leaders stop hanging innocent people. Simon Tisdall is a Guardian foreign affairs commentator
