
3 key looming Trump decisions will shape the future of the economy
That's more or less the go-to line for Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and a host of other top Trump aides and White House officials when they share the administration's plans for tariffs and trade negotiations.
With the August 1 deadline for higher tariffs rapidly approaching, President Donald Trump has a week to make a number of critical decisions about trade that could shape the future of the US and global economies.
Trump in early April paused most of his so-called reciprocal tariffs. They're set to resume next Friday.
But one of the few tariffs that Trump put in place on April 2 that has since stuck is the 10% universal tariff on virtually all goods coming into the United States. In recent weeks, Trump has suggested that he could raise that minimum tariff — perhaps even doubling it.
'We're just going to say all of the remaining countries are going to pay, whether it's 20% or 15%. We'll work that out now,' Trump told NBC News on July 10. He has since floated 15% a number of times.
Trump has sent letters to the leaders of more than a dozen countries over the course of the past few weeks, setting new tariff rates that are scheduled to go into effect August 1. But Trump has a crucial decision to make about every other country: What tariff will they pay?
Most market observers expect the new universal tariff to be set at 15%, because recent trade agreements with Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam were all at or above that level. The Financial Times on Wednesday reported that the European Union is nearing a trade agreement with the United States that sets tariffs on EU goods exported to the United States at 15%.
'After seeing the 15% tariff levied on all Japanese imported goods, let's assume that the new baseline tariff rate will be that, instead of 10%, on all imported goods,' said Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer of One Point BFG Wealth Partners, in a note to investors Wednesday morning.
Trump's tariffs that are currently in effect have raised the effective US tariff rate — the average tax that US importers pay on foreign goods — from around 2% to 18%, the highest since 1934, economists at Yale's Budget Lab said in a recent report. That works out to $2,400 a year in added costs for the average American household.
A higher universal tariff, if that's what Trump ultimately decides to implement, would add to that cost.
With $3.3 trillion of annual imported goods, subtracting the $400 billion of tariff-exempted items from Canada and Mexico, that means roughly $2.9 trillion of goods each year will be taxed at 15% — $435 billion of taxes paid by US consumers and businesses, Boockvar noted.
That's a lot of money: For comparison, that's only $90 billion less than what all corporations pay in US income taxes each year.
Trump has repeatedly suggested that he would put major tariffs on pharmaceuticals that are manufactured outside the United States — the vast majority of US drugs — starting August 1.
A crucial decision for Trump: What will that tariff be, how will it be rolled out, and which drugs will be covered under the new tax?
Trump on July 8 said he would place 200% tariffs on pharmaceuticals 'very soon,' but he noted they may not take full effect for some time to allow drugmakers time to make plans to move to the US. Trump has paused industry-based tariffs before, including autos and auto parts, after company leaders complained that the immediate tariffs gave them insufficient time to shift production to the United States — a costly process that can take years.
It's not clear what Trump's timeframe or plans may be. Trump has floated drug tariffs for months, but has yet to provide any concrete plans.
Patient advocates and drug supply chain experts warn that tariffs would probably lead to higher drug prices and exacerbate drug shortages.
The Trump administration launched an investigation into pharmaceutical imports in mid-April, setting the stage to impose tariffs on national security grounds. The White House and some proponents have argued that the United States needs more domestic drug manufacturing so it does not have to rely on other countries for its supply of medicines.
But any increase in US domestic drug production would probably take years to implement.
Although some drugmakers — most recently AstraZeneca — have announced expansions of their US-based manufacturing initiatives, some were in the works prior to Trump taking office in January, and those factories would not be able to entirely supplant foreign exports to the United States.
A last crucial decision: Trump needs to decide whether he will ultimately allow the massive new tariffs on countries around the world to go into effect — or to delay them again.
After April 2, when Trump put the reciprocal tariffs in place, markets tumbled. By April 9, markets had flirted multiple times with bear market territory, tumbling nearly 20% from the record high they had hit just several weeks earlier. The bond market had also begun to show signs that it might break — until Bessent guided Trump away from his harshest tariff levels.
But since then, Trump has recorded several trade agreements with foreign countries — most importantly, China and Japan — giving investors a significant sense of relief and certainty. Wall Street also believes that, if necessary, it can put significant pressure on Trump to refrain from his most aggressive trade policies — a theory that has generated the moniker 'TACO,' or 'Trump Always Chickens Out.'
With the stock market once again trading at record highs and bond yields stable, Trump may have less incentive to 'chicken out' this time around.
However, the better-than-expected agreement with Japan announced Tuesday suggests the White House may be reluctant to push important trading partners too hard, recognizing that the economic pain from high tariffs and potential tit-for-tat retaliation could prove unacceptable to businesses, investors and the public, noted Ulrike Hoffmann-Burchardi, global head of equities for UBS Global Wealth Management.
So, some of Trump's most aggressive threats, including a 50% tariff on Brazil as punishment for charges against former President Jair Bolsonaro for alleged attempted election fraud, may ultimately be reduced or paused.
CNN's Elisabeth Buchwald, Lex Harvey, Luciana Lopez, Tami Luhby and Meg Tirrell contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Stock market today: Dow, S&P 500, Nasdaq futures trade flat ahead of week poised to shake markets
US stock futures traded flat as Wall Street prepared for fresh earnings and economic data amid a blockbuster week poised to shake markets. Futures attached to the Dow Jones Industrial Average (YM=F) held steady. Futures attached to the benchmark S&P 500 (ES=F) and the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 (NQ=F) ticked up 0.1%. On Monday, the S&P 500 and Nasdaq eked out record highs amid an otherwise subdued trading session as Wall Street digested a new trade deal between the US and EU. Read more: The latest on Trump's tariffs Wall Street heats up Tuesday. Boeing (BA) and Starbucks (SBUX) are set to report earnings with investors eager for signs of turnarounds underway, while Spotify (SPOT) is expected to issue results that feature cautious guidance. Fresh data on job openings from the Labor Department is also set to land, along with a new reading of the Conference Board's consumer-confidence index. Later in the week, investors are bracing for market-moving decisions and results, including the Federal Reserve's next move on interest rates, the July jobs report, and earnings from tech giants Apple (AAPL), Amazon (AMZN), Microsoft (MSFT), and Meta (META). Finally, President Trump's deadline for trading partners to strike deals or else face blanket tariff rates arrives Friday amid a new wave of talks between the US and China. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
States file lawsuit against Trump administration over efforts to collect SNAP recipients' data
Washington (AP) — A coalition of 20 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit Monday challenging the Trump administration's demand that their states turn over personal data of people enrolled in a federally funded food assistance program, fearing the information will be used to aid mass deportations. The data demand comes as the Trump administration has sought to collect private information on mostly lower-income people who may be in the country illegally. It has already ordered the Internal Revenue Service and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to share private information with the Department of Homeland Security to aid in deportation efforts. The U.S. Department of Agriculture told states last week that it had until Wednesday to hand over the data for those enrolled in its Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which serves more than 42 million people nationwide. The USDA said the data will help it combat waste, fraud and abuse. The states' lawsuit seeks an injunction to block the data transfer. In the meantime, state attorneys general in the SNAP lawsuit said they will not disclose what they consider to be private information of recipients — including their immigration status, birthdates and home addresses — because they believe it would be a violation of privacy laws. 'It's a bait-and-switch of the worst kind,' California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a Monday afternoon news conference announcing the lawsuit. 'SNAP recipients provided this information to get help feeding their families, not to be entered into a government surveillance database or be used as targets in the president's inhumane immigration agenda.' In May, the department announced it was seeking the data as part of President Donald Trump's executive order to obtain data from state programs to help root out fraud and waste. 'For years, this program has been on autopilot, with no USDA insight into real-time data,' USDA Secretary Brooke L. Rollins said in a statement at the time. 'The Department is focused on appropriate and lawful participation in SNAP, and today's request is one of many steps to ensure SNAP is preserved for only those eligible.' USDA officials declined a request for comment on the suit. The USDA did not mention immigration enforcement in the announcement or later notices. It is not clear why USDA officials believe the data will help it weed out fraud and abuse. The agency claims the program is already 'one of the most rigorous quality control systems in the federal government.' Immigration advocates noted that the Trump administration has used the same argument to obtain other sensitive data, only to later admit it would be using the information to enhance its deportation operations. Trump administration officials, for example, initially claimed they were seeking state Medicaid data to fight fraud. Last week, a top immigration official conceded they would be utilizing that same information to locate immigrants. Agency officials have threatened to withhold SNAP funding if states fail to comply with their demand for data. While immigrants without legal status are ineligible to receive SNAP benefits, they can apply on behalf of their children who are U.S. citizens or those who are part of a mixed-status household. Under the program, formerly known as food stamps, the federal government pays for 100% of the food benefits, but the states help cover the administrative costs. States are also responsible for determining whether individuals are eligible for benefits and for issuing those benefits to enrollees. Immigration and data privacy advocates expressed alarm at the Trump administration's efforts to obtain sensitive SNAP data maintained by states. 'The administration has all but told us that their intention is to comb this data and use it for unlawful purposes that include immigration enforcement,' said Madeline Wiseman, an attorney with the National Student Legal Defense Network, which filed a lawsuit in May with privacy and hunger relief groups that are also challenging USDA's efforts for SNAP data. —- Contact the AP's global investigative team at Investigative@ or


CBS News
12 minutes ago
- CBS News
Petition calls for Pennsylvania high school to remove Benjamin Netanyahu from Hall of Fame
A petition is calling for Cheltenham High School in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, to remove Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from its Hall of Fame. The petition, which the Cheltenham High School Alumni Association started, says, "Benjamin Netanyahu's presence in Cheltenham's Hall of Fame sends the wrong message to current students — many of whom have spoken out against his continued recognition." "Netanyahu has been indicted on corruption charges and now faces an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes in Gaza," the petition reads. "These are not credentials that belong in a school hallway." Netanyahu was born in Tel Aviv, but he also spent time growing up in the United States. He graduated from Cheltenham High School in 1967. Brian W. Scriven, the superintendent of schools in the Cheltenham School District, said in a statement that "no decision" has been made regarding Netanyahu's status in the school's hall of fame after he met with officials from the alumni association on Monday. "We understand that this is a topic of deep concern to some members of our diverse school community as well as the broader public. Given the complexities involved and the heightened public discourse, we must proceed in a deliberate manner," Scriven said in part. "At this time, as the alumni association prepares to induct a new class of hall of fame members, the district is focused on ensuring all internal processes — from selection committee meetings to candidate evaluation criteria — are conducted fairly and consistently and with collaboration among all constituents," he added.