
Trump's reciprocal tariffs will overturn decades of trade policy
President Donald Trump is taking a blowtorch to the rules that have governed world trade for decades. The 'reciprocal'' tariffs that he announced on Thursday are likely to create chaos for global businesses and conflict with America's allies and adversaries alike.
Since the 1960s, tariffs - or import taxes - have emerged from negotiations between dozens of countries. Trump wants to seize the process.
'Obviously, it disrupts the way that things have been done for a very long time,'' said Richard Mojica, a trade attorney at Miller & Chevalier. 'Trump is throwing that out the window ... Clearly this is ripping up trade. There are going to have to be adjustments all over the place.''
Pointing to America's massive and persistent trade deficits - not since 1975 has the US sold the rest of the world more than it's bought -- Trump charges that the playing field is tilted against US companies. A big reason for that, he and his advisers say, is because other countries usually tax American exports at a higher rate than America taxes theirs.
Trump has a fix: He's raising US tariffs to match what other countries charge.
The president is an unabashed tariff supporter. He used them in his first term, and three weeks into his second he has already slapped 10% tariffs on China; effectively raised US taxes on foreign steel and aluminum; and threatened, then delayed for 30 days, 25% taxes on goods from Canada and Mexico.
Economists don't share Trump's enthusiasm for tariffs. They're a tax on importers that usually get passed on to consumers. But it's possible that Trump's reciprocal tariff threat could bring other countries to the table and get them to lower their own import taxes.
'It could be win-win,' said Christine McDaniel, a former US trade official now at George Mason University's Mercatus Center. 'It's in other countries' interests to reduce those tariffs.'
She noted that India has already cut tariffs on items from motorcycles to luxury cars and agreed to ramp up purchases of US energy.
They sound simple: The United States would raise its tariff on foreign goods to match what other countries impose on US products.
'If they charge us, we charge them,'' the president told reporters on Sunday. 'If they're at 25, we're at 25. If they're at 10, we're at 10. And if they're much higher than 25, that's what we are too.''
But the White House didn't reveal many details. It has directed Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to deliver a report April 1 about how the new tariffs would actually work.
Among the outstanding questions, noted Antonio Rivera, a partner at ArentFox Schiff and a former attorney with US Customs and Border Protection, is whether the US is going to look at the thousands of items in the tariff code - from motorcycles to mangos -- and try to level the tariff rates out one by one, country by country. Or whether it will look more broadly at each country's average tariff and how it compares to America. Or something else entirely.
'It's just a very, very chaotic environment,' said Stephen Lamar, president and CEO of the American Apparel & Footwear Association. 'It's hard to plan in any sort of long-term, sustainable way.''
America's tariffs are generally lower than those of its trading partners. After World War II, the United States pushed for other countries to lower trade barriers and tariffs, seeing free trade as a way to promote peace, prosperity and American exports around the world. And it mostly practiced what it preached, generally keeping its own tariffs low and giving American consumers access to inexpensive foreign goods.
Trump has broken with the old free trade consensus, saying unfair foreign competition has hurt American manufacturers and devastated factory towns in the American heartland. During his first term, he slapped tariffs on foreign steel, aluminum, washing machines, solar panels and almost everything from China. Democratic President Joe Biden largely continued Trump's protectionist policies.
The White House has cited several examples of especially lopsided tariffs: Brazil taxes ethanol imports, including America's, at 18%, but the US tariff on ethanol is just 2.5%. Likewise, India taxes foreign motorcycles at 100%, America just 2.4%.
The higher foreign tariffs that Trump complains about weren't sneakily adopted by foreign countries. The United States agreed to them after years of complex negotiations known as the Uruguay Round, which ended in a trade pact involving 123 countries.
As part of the deal, the countries could set their own tariffs on different products - but under the 'most favored nation'' approach, they couldn't charge one country more than they charged another. So the high tariffs Trump complains about aren't aimed at the United States alone. They hit everybody.
Trump's grievances against US trading partners also come at an odd time.
Hashtags

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


Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
How big tech and populism are upending 'western values'
The highly tense and polarised situation within the US and EU raises unprecedented challenges, especially amid the ongoing shifting of the global order from a unipolar to a multipolar one. Since the beginning the of the 21st century, the world has been embroiled in a series of crises: the war on terror, the global financial crisis, intensifying climate change, a worldwide pandemic, and a renewed great-power competition. This uneasy landscape has been further complicated by the Fourth Industrial Revolution, of which artificial intelligence is the most compelling and pervasive example, alongside the crisis of globalisation, the rise of China and the start of the second Trump administration. On the latter point, US President Donald Trump is now contesting, if not repudiating, the same world order that Washington created, managed and enforced over the past eight decades. His administration is wielding its new army of big tech companies in an alleged pursuit of a political, economic, cultural and social metamorphosis of humankind. It is not yet clear whether these big tech players will be a tool in the hands of Trump's 'America First' vision, or vice versa. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters As the late former secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, remarked seven years ago: 'Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era and to force it to give up its old pretences. It doesn't necessarily mean that he knows this, or that he is considering any great alternative. It could just be an accident.' New words have emerged in the current lexicon to explain this epochal change, such as techno-feudalism, techno-optimism and 'Dark Enlightenment'. A cast of characters from big tech - somewhere between CEOs and gurus - are now influencing politics, economics and the relationship between humans and technology to an unprecedented degree. 'Shadow empire' Some of these figures are in the spotlight daily, such as Tesla's Elon Musk, Open AI's Sam Altman and Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, while others seem more comfortable leading from behind the scenes. Some are perceived as the vanguard of 'reactionary acceleration', while others, like Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, who mentored Vice President JD Vance, portrays this period as the 'dusky final weeks of our interregnum' - or, if you prefer, the last days of an ancien regime; a sort of twilight, or worse, an apocalypse. It may be that change of era of which the late Pope Francis warned five years ago in his astute encyclical 'Fratelli Tutti' (All Brothers). Both European and American liberal-democratic establishments believe this change brings a fundamental threat to democracy and western societies, along with the 'values' upon which they are built. Who ultimately has the right to decide who's in and who's out? In normal times, this power would be in the hands of the electors They seem terrified by the possible rise of what has been described brilliantly, but disturbingly, as a 'shadow empire' driven by big tech magnates. At the same time, the rise of far-right movements in the US and Europe is seen as a clear and present danger that requires a 'whatever it takes' approach to keep these parties out of power. These widespread fears could explain some unprecedented developments in recent months in France, Germany and Romania. In France, Marine Le Pen's National Rally made significant gains in last year's legislative elections, despite a massive mobilisation against the party - but now a criminal conviction could derail her future political prospects. In Germany, a similar mobilisation occurred against the far-right Alternative fur Deutschland (AfD), but the party still managed to double its vote share in February elections. Yet it now risks being banned after Germany's spy agency classified AfD as 'extremist', allowing for increased state monitoring. Populists on the rise The most stunning event, however, was in Romania, where presidential elections were cancelled by the country's constitutional court last December after the first round was won by far-right candidate Calin Georgescu, amid allegations of Russian interference. Among the evidence cited in the declassified Romanian intelligence documents used to justify this decision was a coordinated TikTok campaign - but an investigative report later revealed that the centre-right National Liberal Party had paid for the campaign, which was hijacked to benefit Georgescu, who was subsequently banned from standing in the new election. Paris, Berlin and Bucharest have thus provided compelling examples of what 'whatever it takes' might mean. Amusingly, such behaviour drew criticism from Vance - not exactly a champion in the observance of democratic values - during his recent speech at the Munich Security Conference. The new fascism: Israel is the template for Trump and Europe's war on freedom Read More » 'For years, we've been told that everything we fund and support is in the name of our shared democratic values. Everything from our Ukraine policy to digital censorship is billed as a defence of democracy,' Vance said. 'But when we see European courts cancelling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we're holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard.' The bare facts, however, are that some of these populist forces are already in power, from Trump and his Maga supporters in the US; to Giorgia Meloni, now into her third year as Italy's prime minister; to the relaxed Viktor Orban who rules Hungary; to Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico, who has already survived an assassination attempt. Similar political forces appear to be on the rise in other countries. Some polls show a commanding lead for Reform UK, led by Nigel Farage. In Poland, an EU sceptic has just been elected president. Curiously, there is not much pushback over the questionable tactics and techniques being employed across Europe in efforts to keep far-right contenders out of power. Are such moves justifiable to bar from office allegedly undemocratic political figures and movements? Who ultimately has the right to decide who's in and who's out? In normal times, this power would be in the hands of the electors - but these do not seem to be normal times. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.


The National
an hour ago
- The National
Oil heading for weekly gain amid optimism over US-China tariff talks
Oil prices were up on Friday and were heading for their first weekly gain in three weeks amid hopes for a US-China deal on tariffs. Brent, the benchmark for two thirds of the world's oil, was up 0.11 per cent at $65.41 a barrel at 2.49pm UAE time. West Texas Intermediate, the gauge that tracks US crude, added 0.05 per cent to $63.40 per barrel. Both Brent and WTI, which reversed earlier losses on Friday, are on pace for a 4.2 per cent weekly gain. For the year, they are down about 12 per cent. Crude futures posted modest gains on Thursday, but the market became more optimistic after a phone call between US President Donald Trump and China's Xi Jinping, who agreed to resume negotiations on trade and tariffs. The US and China are the two main protagonists in the global trade war, imposing tit-for-tat levies on each other's imports. However, they agreed to a detente on May 12, with Washington lowering its 145 per cent tariffs on Chinese imports to 30 per cent, while Beijing dialled down its own levies from 125 per cent to 10 per cent. The call between the two leaders, a sign of progress in their countries' negotiations, 'prompt[ed] relief after a recent escalation in tensions', analysts at Vanda Insights said. Crude prices took a hit after Mr Trump's sweeping global tariffs announced on April 2 disrupted stock markets and reignited fears of a global recession. However, with many of the tariffs temporarily paused and the US seeking deals with its partners, the uncertainty has reduced. A positive sign for oil prices is the decline in US oil inventories, indicating demand for the commodity remains strong. At the moment, market fundamentals seem to remain balanced, especially after Opec+ last month agreed to increase its monthly oil output at 411,000 barrels per day for July, the same as in May and June, analysts at Fitch unit BMI said. The decision was 'in view of a steady global economic outlook and current healthy market fundamentals, as reflected in the low oil inventories', the group said. Opec+ noted that gradual increases may be paused or reversed 'subject to evolving market conditions' and 'flexibility will allow the group to continue to support oil market stability'. Analysts say the move by Opec+ may be a gesture to mollify Mr Trump, who has called for lower crude prices. BMI analysts, however, cautioned that any slower economic growth later in 2025 'will see markets tip into oversupply'. They also expect a similar production rise for August, 'should market conditions and prices remain steady'. 'But both weaker demand for oil and increased production from both Opec+ and non-Opec producers will add to downside price pressures in the coming quarters,' BMI said. Upstream oil investments are projected to be under $570 billion in 2025, which would be a 6 per cent decline, marking the first annual drop since the Covid-induced slide in 2020 and the largest since 2016, the International Energy Agency said on Thursday. The decrease is being attributed to lower oil prices and demand expectations, amid economic uncertainties, the Paris-based IEA said.


Al Etihad
2 hours ago
- Al Etihad
Trump and Musk to speak on Friday after alliance descends into public feud
6 June 2025 15:02 WASHINGTON (REUTERS)Donald Trump's aides scheduled a call between the US president and Elon Musk for Friday after a huge public spat.A White House official said the two men would speak on Friday. The official did not give a time for the call, which could ease the feuding after an extraordinary day of hostilities - largely conducted over social media - that marked a stark end to a close in Musk's Tesla closed down over 14% on Thursday, losing about $150 billion in market value in the largest single-day decline in value in its history. In pre-market European trading on Friday they pared some of those losses, rising 5% after the news that the two men were scheduled to speak. Politico first reported the planned had bankrolled a large part of Trump's presidential campaign and was then brought as one of the president's most visible advisers, heading up a sweeping and controversial effort to downsize the federal workforce and slash verbal punches erupted on Thursday after Trump criticised Musk in the Oval Office and the pair then traded barbs on their social media platforms: Trump's Truth Social and Musk's falling-out had begun brewing days ago when Musk, who left his role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency a week ago, denounced Trump's sweeping tax-cut and spending president initially stayed quiet while Musk campaigned to torpedo the bill, saying it would add too much to the nation's $36.2 trillion in broke his silence on Thursday, telling reporters he was "very disappointed" in Musk."Look, Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore," Trump said. As Trump spoke, Musk responded on X. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election," wrote Musk, who spent nearly $300 million backing Trump and other Republicans in last year's another post, Musk asserted that Trump's signature import tariffs would push the US into a recession later this year."The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts," Trump after the closing bell, Musk replied, "Yes," to a post on X saying Trump should be impeached, something that would be highly unlikely given Trump's Republicans hold majorities in both chambers of businesses also include rocket company and government contractor SpaceX and its satellite unit whose space business plays a critical role in the US government's space program, said that as a result of Trump's threats he would begin decommissioning SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft. Dragon is the only US spacecraft capable of sending astronauts to the International Space on Thursday, Musk backed off the another sign of a possible detente to come, Musk subsequently wrote: "You're not wrong," in response to billionaire investor Bill Ackman saying Trump and Musk should make peace. Punching Back Trump and Musk are both political fighters with a penchant for using social media to attack their perceived enemies, and many observers had predicted a hit at the heart of Trump's agenda earlier this week when he targeted what Trump has named his "big, beautiful bill", calling it a "disgusting abomination" that would deepen the federal attacks amplified a rift within the Republican Party that could threaten the bill's prospects in the analysts say Trump's bill could add $2.4 trillion to $5 trillion to the nation's $36.2 trillion in debt. A prolonged feud between the pair could make it harder for Republicans to keep control of Congress in next year's midterm elections if it leads to a loss of Musk's campaign spending or erodes support for Trump in Silicon Valley."Elon really was a significant portion of the ground game this last cycle," said a Republican strategist with ties to Musk and the Trump administration who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity."If he sits out the midterms, that worries me."On Tuesday, Musk posted that "in November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people." Musk had already said he planned to curtail his political spending in the future. Musk's increasing focus on politics provoked widespread protests at Tesla sites, driving down sales while investors fretted that Musk's attention was too divided.