Trump's new tariff threats show trade uncertainty here to stay
TIL Creatives Representative Image
Investors were growing optimistic that Donald Trump's trade wars had started to calm down. His latest tariff broadsides quickly disabused them of that notion. Initial agreements with the UK and China buoyed hopes on Wall Street and in corporate boardrooms that the US president was starting to peel back the highest US tariffs in nearly a century.
But Friday delivered a harsh reminder of Trump's volatile policymaking and penchant for brinkmanship, when he threatened a 50% tariff on the European Union and a 25% levy on smart phones if companies including Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. failed to move production to the US.
Equities dropped across the globe, the dollar slumped to its lowest level since 2023 and business leaders were left to grapple with the notion that Trump-generated uncertainty is here to stay. 'Today's news that Trump is threatening enormous tariffs on the EU and is singling out Apple as a firm are examples of what we we should expect for the next two months if not for the rest of the year,' said Marcus Noland, executive vice president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 'Peace has not broken out.'
Trump made that clear when from the Oval Office Friday afternoon, he dug in, declaring he is 'not looking for a deal' with the EU.'I just said it's time that we play the game the way I know how to play the game,' he told reporters. His ire was notable given that he notched a major economic win this week, with the House passing his massive tax and spending legislation after Trump led a furious, last-minute lobbying effort that won over enough Republican hold-outs.
A White House official said this week that the president was hoping to ink more trade agreements with some major economies and then fast-track deals with others during a 90-day pause on his tariffs announced April 2. Some arrangements are said to be close, including one with India, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News on Friday. Business leaders and consumers will be watching carefully for next steps. The president's Friday directive on the EU offered a preview of what he said his administration might do with dozens of trading partners seeking lower duties: simply dictate tariff levels. As he did last month after Trump's initial tariff announcement shook markets, Bessent sought to project a sense of order onto the president's pronouncements.Bessent said in the same interview that many deals are nearing conclusion and labeled the EU as an 'exception.' That echoed comments from Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who said at an Axios event earlier this week that the EU has been 'very difficult.'
Longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon said the president's reaction was in part due to what he saw as a lack of progress on trade issues this week at a Group of Seven finance ministers meeting, particularly given the relatively quick deal he was able to strike with the UK. Bannon said other countries without deals in progress should be worried, calling it a 'storm warning.' The president seemed as committed to his tariff push as ever to close the week. He threw his support behind a partnership between United States Steel Corp. and Japan's Nippon Steel Corp., crediting his tariffs for finalizing the pact that had been in the works for years. That announcement came as Japanese trade negotiators were holding talks with US trade officials in Washington.
Negotiations beckon The EU plans to move forward with preparing countermeasures if negotiations fail to produce a satisfactory outcome. The trade bloc has assembled plans to hit €95 billion ($107 billion) of US exports with additional tariffs in response to Trump's 'reciprocal' levies and 25% duties on cars and some parts. European nations agreed earlier this month to pause for 90 days a separate set of retaliatory tariffs against the US over 25% levies Trump imposed on the bloc's steel and aluminum exports. That move came after Trump lowered his so-called reciprocal rate on most EU exports to 10% from 20% for the same amount of time.Lutnick predicted at the Axios event that most countries will 'have an idea of what we want to do with them' by summer. He repeated the administration's stance that partners will likely not get below a 10% baseline tariff, but made clear the White House is open to negotiation. 'If they've made us an offer worthy of modifying their tariff terms, we'll do it. And if they haven't made us an offer that modifies it, the president will write them a letter saying 'Dear Country A, we deeply appreciate doing business with you, here's your tariff rate,' he said.When Trump paused his higher April 2 tariffs, he left in place a 10% charge on most trading partners. Separate levies on steel, aluminum and autos remain. And Trump has promised a range of new import taxes on copper, semiconductor chips, pharmaceutical drugs, lumber and aircraft parts — all of which could drive up the total effective tariff rate. At the same time, Trump showed a willingness to negotiate on duties imposed on specific sectors when the US and UK agreed to negotiate new rates on metals. Tariff levels remain uncertain but 'will probably remain elevated for the foreseeable future,' Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analysts wrote in a May 14 research note. The bank forecast that the effective US tariff rate would rise by 13 percentage points this year, to the highest level since the 1930s. It could all be for naught, with Goldman saying 'higher bilateral tariffs are unlikely to drive a substantial increase in domestic production,' a stated goal of Trump. Talks are advancing with other partners including India, Japan, Vietnam and Israel. Some short-term relief could be possible, but the threat of fresh trade feuds is widespread across several countries.Trump's penchant for out-of-nowhere threats, even on countries with which the US has trade agreements, sows doubt in the longevity of any deal he strikes, Noland said. 'It's really quite extraordinary that we had free trade agreements with some of these countries — Korea, Australia — and they're just getting hit with tariffs,' Noland said. 'His willingness to tear up previous agreements and ignore them has to be highly concerning for other countries.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
US stock market outlook: Will S&P 500, Dow Jones, Nasdaq witness another best month?
US stock market will look to start the month of June in positive manner after Wall Street registered its best month since 2023. All eyes are on S&P 500, Dow Jones, and Nasdaq. S&P 500 finished the day nearly unchanged after edging down by less than 0.1 per cent. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 54 points, or 0.1 per cent, and the Nasdaq composite slipped 0.3 per cent. S&P 500 edged down 0.48 to 5,911.69 points. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 54.34 to 42,270.07, and the Nasdaq composite slipped 62.11 to 19,113.77. Wall Street have been dominated by questions about what will happen with Trump's tariffs, which investors worry could grind the economy into a recession, slash companies' profits and layer even more challenges on households already sick of inflation. Hopes had largely been rising that the worst of such worries had passed, which in turn sent stocks rallying, after Trump paused his tariffs on both China and the European Union. A U.S. court then on Wednesday blocked many of Trump's sweeping tariffs. It all sent the S&P 500 in May to its first winning month in four and its best since November. But the tariffs remain in place for now while the White House appeals the ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade, and the ultimate outcome is still uncertain. FAQs Live Events Q1. What are key indexes of US Stock Market? A1. US Stock Market's key indexes are -- S&P 500, Dow Jones, and Nasdaq. Q2. How are US Stock Market indexes performing? A2. S&P 500 finished the day nearly unchanged after edging down by less than 0.1 per cent. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 54 points, or 0.1 per cent, and the Nasdaq composite slipped 0.3 per cent. S&P 500 edged down 0.48 to 5,911.69 points. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 54.34 to 42,270.07, and the Nasdaq composite slipped 62.11 to 19,113.77.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Resource war: How commercial assets turned into front line weaponry
Chennai: Recently, J.D. Vance, the US vice president, confirmed what the world feared. He termed the competition between the US and China in developing artificial intelligence (AI) as an 'arms race'. Policy makers in both the countries believe that whoever wins this race will dominate the world, going forward. At the core of this battle is computing power and this has given a fresh impetus to the chip war that began between the US and China five years ago. In May 2020, during his first term as the president of the US, Donald Trump fired the first salvo. The US commerce department added Chinese tech giant Huawei Technologies to the 'Entity List', a measure which prevented the company that sells smartphones, telecom equipment and cloud computing services from accessing advanced computer chips produced or developed using US technology or software. The reason? The US feared that Huawei's attractively priced products, backed by Chinese government subsidy, would soon dominate the next generation telecom networks, ending American clout in the field. The move had a debilitating impact on Huawei. Its global expansion took a hit and revenue crashed. 'A corporate giant faced technological asphyxiation," Chris Miller, in his book Chip War, wrote. According to him, this development reminded China of its weakness. 'In nearly every step of the process of producing semiconductors, China is staggeringly dependent on foreign technology, almost all of which is controlled by its geopolitical rivals—Taiwan, Japan, South Korea or the US," he wrote. China began investing billions of dollars to develop its own semiconductor technology in a bid to free itself from America's chip choke, he added. But the US is in no mood to make this endeavour easy for China. It has progressively tightened restrictions on China's semiconductor sector. The 'Entity List' has since grown to include over 140 Chinese companies—fabrication units, semiconductor tool companies and even investment companies that operate in the sector. Restrictions have extended from chips with high bandwidth memory to semiconductor manufacturing equipment and software tools. China, which sees US restrictions as an attempt to deny it the technological greatness it deserves, has retaliated. It began imposing restrictions on export of critical and rare earth minerals that are crucial for production of weapons, semiconductors and electric vehicles. There are 17 rare earth minerals and China has absolute control on most of them (see chart). In October 2023, it introduced export permits for graphite needed to produce lithium ion batteries. In December that year, it banned transfer of rare earth minerals extraction and separation technologies and the technology to make magnets. China, over the years, has mastered these technologies. In the same month, it banned the export of antimony, gallium and germanium apart from imposing stricter review of graphite exports to the US. In February 2025, in response to Donald Trump imposing 10% tariffs on all Chinese products, the middle kingdom added five more critical minerals— tungsten, indium, bismuth, tellurium and molybdenum to the export control list. This meant that companies require special export licenses to export the minerals. On 4 April, after Trump's Liberation Day tariffs, China further added seven more minerals and magnets to the export restrictions list. There is no clarity whether these restrictions have been suspended after the recent US and China trade talks in Geneva. The US is now scrambling to find alternate sources for these minerals. All of a sudden, economic resources which were till recently seen predominantly as commercial assets, have acquired new edge as strategic instruments. They are no longer controlled just by the market— geopolitics has a greater say over them. A short history Demand for resources began to rise after the Industrial Revolution in 1760 which introduced the use of metals such as iron and steel. The rise of mechanized factory systems increased output and thus, demand for resources. As the demand rose, countries such as Great Britain, France and Belgium began colonizing the world in search of resources. 'Colonization was all about exploitation of natural resources," said S. Gurumurthy, writer and a corporate advisor. The British empire met its demand for cotton, tea, leather, coal and iron ore from India for almost two centuries, he added. Post World War II, resources were seen as market instruments. They were freely traded for a price. According to the World Trade Organization, between 1950 and 2024, global trade volumes grew by 4,500%. 'It was also a period when countries used trade to increase co-dependence in the hope that it would enhance peace and welfare," Dhruva Jaishankar, executive director, Observer Research Foundation — America, said. Europe bought gas from Russia in the hope that the latter would leave them alone. The US built a strong economic relationship with China on the assumption that the Asian nation could integrate with the global economy, eliminate poverty, and embrace democratic principles. Of course, trade in resources has not been entirely free. Nations have imposed restrictions. In the last 75 years, the US is the biggest culprit. As a sole super power, it denied various countries technology and resources that it deemed were dual use—for both civil and military applications. As the US-China rivalry intensifies, the weaponization is spilling beyond dual use technologies. China, it appears, is not loath to leveraging the domination it has built in the global economy. The new normal China accounts for more than 30% of global manufacturing output. This is the highest concentration of manufacturing in one place," said Jaishankar. The US had a similar share for a short period of time immediately after World War II when the protracted war had destroyed much of production facilities in mainland Europe and Japan. 'China has managed to achieve this without a war," he said, adding 'it is now trying to use its manufacturing power as a strategic leverage." It is not just manufacturing. Consider China's domination in the shipping space. It controls over 100 ports across 63 nations. As of 2022, it had 96% share in container production, 48% of global ship building orders and 80% of ship-to-shore cranes. It has similar domination across many sectors. 'What is worrying is that China has revealed its intention to weaponize goods, logistics or the entire supply chain," said an Indian government official who did not want to be identified. There is a conscious attempt by China to make the world depend on it. Simultaneously, it is reducing its dependence on the world. The restriction on export of rare earth minerals is just a beginning, he added. The resentment For more than four decades, China had silently focused on growing its economy. It eased rules to attract manufacturing taking advantage of its low wage costs. It invested in infrastructure—power, roads, ports and airports. It enabled building factories at unheard of scale which substantially reduced the cost of production. Global brands rushed to China to take advantage of it. Until a few years ago, 85% of all iPhone produced by Apple were assembled in China. At one point in time, almost all of Nike's shoes were produced in China. There were warnings within the US about this excessive dependence. Michael Pillsbury's book, The Hundred-Year Marathon, detailed China's secret desire to upstage the US as a global superpower. He, indeed many others, pointed out that China harboured a deep resentment and a sense of injury for losing its status as a middle kingdom when it dominated the world—economically, culturally and militarily. In the early 1700s, China (and India) had a large share of the world economy. On the eve of the Industrial Revolution, in 1760, it accounted for a third of the global economy. In the two centuries that followed, it lost out significantly. By 1979, China's share of the global economy was just 2%. Chinese consider the period between 1839 and 1945 a 'century of humiliation' that saw political fragmentation, decline and subjugation by foreign powers such as Russia, Japan and the West. The Chinese yearned to regain this lost glory. Today, China has 19% share in the global GDP, fast catching up with the US' 27%. Late wakeup call Policy makers in the US, for years, took a benign view of China's growth. Pillsbury pointed out that they saw their China policy as a commercial win and ignored the strategic dimension. Only when China began to assert itself, did they realise the depth of US' dependence on China and its real motive. It is not a surprise that Pillsbury, as Trump's advisor, is the architect of US' China policy now. Today, the US and China are engaged in a contest. The US is playing to its strength by denying advanced technology to China. By focusing on the massive $295 trade deficit (in 2024) and imposing massive tariffs, the Trump administration wants to reduce its dependence. China, for its part, is thinking long term to upstage the US. Lizzi Lee, a fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute's Centre for China Analysis, best described its strategy in a recent Financial Times article. He wrote: 'Xi is not looking to win the trade war in a conventional sense. He's positioning China for a drawn-out, grinding, contest by building domestic capacity, hardening supply chain and rooting out perceived vulnerabilities to foreign pressure." India play As the US and China fight for supremacy, India needs to have a strategy to deal with the fallout. 'Countries, be it China or the US, have exclusive rights over their resources. Weaponizing such resources is the new normal," said Ajay Srivastava, founder, Global Trade Research Initiative, a trade focussed think tank. India needs to put in place policies to minimise the impact of such decisions. India should identify and develop resources that the world would need and use it as a bargaining chip, he added. 'India may lack such resources now but we need to identify those and invest now," Gurumurthy added. China, Jaishankar said, does not have all the resources within its nation. It had worked assiduously to tap these critical minerals across the world, especially from African nations. China's strength, he added, is in developing the ability to process them in an effective manner. 'India needs to follow a similar strategy. We should strike deals with nations which have these resources and import the mineral for processing in India. That will give us control over it," he explained. India has already drawn up a list of critical minerals and has taken steps to secure them. It is part of the Mineral Security Partnership, a multi-nation initiative led by the US comprising 40 countries. It has struck, or is close to striking, a few deals in Latin America and Africa. But processing the minerals is easier said than done. It is capital intensive and requires a long lead time. Investors don't support such projects unless there is a strong business case. Experts have also suggested that India should frame policies to suit its strengths. Some have questioned pushing electrification of vehicles in a big way. With India lacking the raw material to make batteries, the rise in electric vehicles will shift India's energy dependence from West Asia to China. Others have recommended that India should invest heavily in taking a lead in green hydrogen. India is blessed with abundant sunlight and focus on storage systems can help it use solar power to drive green hydrogen efforts. India's efforts, such as production-linked incentives, have cut its dependence on China for solar cells and modules. More needs to be done if India has to become self-sufficient. To make all this possible, the country, particularly its private sector, would need to invest in research and development. If there is one thing that can come in India's way is its hubris, warned experts. 'What is needed is a long term vision and a step-by-step approach to achieve it," GTRI's Srivastava said.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
What is EB-5 visa? Indian students explore new path as Trump administration tightens immigration laws
An increasing number of Indians are now choosing a different path as the US tightens its immigration laws and current immigrants are subject to greater scrutiny under the Donald Trump administration. The Economic Times reported that immigration lawyers have witnessed over 100 percent increase in EB-5 petitions from Indian students in the last four to five months. With an investment of $800,000 (about ₹7 crore), overseas investors reportedly can obtain a Green Card or permanent residency via this EB-5 procedure. However, it has restricted only 700 sets for India. In contrast to other years, there has been a significant rise in EB-5 petitions despite the restricted number of seats. Also Read: Over 69,000 Indian students hit hard as ICE targets OPT program with strict warning letters Speaking to ET, Rajneesh Pathak, founder of the immigration law company Global North Residency and Citizenship, said: 'Unlike previous years, when we had most-ly H-1B visa holders applying, the interest from F-1 visa holders has risen by 100% over the last few months.' According to the study, the US Immigration Fund (USIF), which operates EB-5 Regional Centers, has witnessed a 100% increase in F-1 visa holders applying for EB-5 visas since January of this year as compared to 2024, when the majority of candidates were H-1B holders. The Donald Trump administration significantly cancelled the visas of more than 300 overseas students this year due to their alleged participation in 'campus activism' and 'engagement with anti-national content' on social media. According to reports, the US Department of State (DOS) sent emails to thousands of students telling them that their F-1 visas have been terminated and that they are required to use the CBP Home App for self-deportation. Indian students and H-1B holders are now very interested in pursuing the EB-5 visa path. According to the report, the majority of international applicants for EB-5 are in highly competitive industries including computer science, biotechnology, and finance. The US Citizenship and Immigration Services states that investors (as well as their spouses and unmarried children under 21) can submit applications for legal permanent residence (a Green Card) under this program. This is possible only if they invest the required amount in a US-based business; Plan to create or maintain 10 permanent full-time jobs for eligible US workers. Participants in this program are granted an employment-based fifth preference visa, which is called EB-5.
