Latest news with #Lighthizer
The Print
6 days ago
- Business
- The Print
15 ‘oligarch billionaires' run India: Ex-Trump negotiator Lighthizer on why he failed with New Delhi
Late on Monday, Trump threatened substantial tariffs on India as he accused it of buying and reselling 'massive amounts' of Russian oil 'for big profits'. With Trump repeating the threat days after announcing 25% tariffs and a Russia penalty on India, a reading of Lighthizer's book presents key insights on Trump's India stance. Lighthizer writes in No Trade is Free that he would try to predict India's position in talks by tracking the interests of its 15 billionaires or 'oligarchs who ran the country', giving a rare insider's peek into how the US President's India policy has unfolded over his two terms. New Delhi: As US President Donald Trump has again threatened to raise tariffs on India supposedly for its Russian oil purchase, it's instructive to see what former US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who set Trump's trade agenda and negotiated with India, had to say in a 2023 book. Lighthizer, a veteran trade negotiator and once a free-trade sceptic, is widely considered to have curated policy moves of US President Donald Trump, who abruptly revoked special trade privileges to India in his first term. He referred to these billionaires as 'oligarchs' and said it was unusual in the extent to which they 'influence government policy' in India. The 77-year-old also said that India 'suffered from an extremely strong professional bureaucracy' in all areas of government. 'When I was in negotiations with Indian officials, I kept a copy of the biography of each of the country's fifteen or so billionaires on my desk. In predicting Indian government positions, I would look to the interests of these men,' Lighthizer wrote in his book, which was published in 2023. India's opposition parties have often alleged that largecorporate houses and industrialists, such as Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani, enjoy easy access to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government, which work in their interests in exchange for funds. 'I can remember at one point telling an Indian friend of mine who had made a fortune in business that I thought there were fifteen oligarchs who basically ran the country. He corrected me. 'Bob, you're wrong. Only about seven of them actually run the country. The others just try to influence the seven',' Lighthizer wrote in the book, which has an entire chapter dedicated to India. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has called Modi's government a 'suit-boot ki sarkar' (government for the rich) to try to corner the Bharatiya Janata Party as recently as during the 2024 general elections. The Prime Minister has outrightly rejected the allegations, saying that such deceitful political vendetta only hurts the electoral prospects of the Congress. While the two industrialists, also two of India's wealthiest men, have not addressed the charges publicly, their business entities have denied allegations by the Opposition on several counts. India's 'protectionism' In his second term, US President Trump is pushing on with a tariff blitz across countries as he attempts to 'reorder the global economy' with the highest rates since the 1930s. Talks between New Delhi and Washington to clinch a trade deal have remained stalled, with experts saying highly protected agriculture and dairy sectors are sticky issues. Lighthizer also referred to India's 'protectionist' stance in his book. 'India is particularly protectionist in the agricultural sector, where it uses tariffs and safety standards to help politically potent farmers groups,' he wrote in his book, which is full of praise for Trump and his style of politics. In fact, he wrote that he once told Prime Minister Modi that India was 'the most protectionist country in the world' and that it was causing a large and growing trade deficit. 'Indian trade policies have long caused tensions with the United States. India uses many of the tools of modern mercantilism. It has high tariffs, a bureaucracy focused on keeping imports out, and a system of industrial policy and protectionism.' Also Read: Pakistan, Dhaka have played Washington well. Back home, Modi ecosystem has an inner conflict 'Natural friends' India & US Lighthizer, however, said India and the US were 'natural friends'. 'Perhaps, most importantly, the rise and growing militarism of China is the greatest geopolitical concern for both our nations… India feels as threatened as we do by the aggressive surge of China. There is truth in the old saying (modified for obvious reasons) that the adversary of my adversary is my friend.' Lighthizer, once called by Trump the 'greatest United States trade representative in American history', played a crucial role in the imposition of hefty tariffs on Chinese imports during the first term of the US President. While India-US relations grew for the most part during the presidency of Joe Biden, they have remained fragmented due to several trade and policy differences under the deceptive exterior of a vibrant bonhomie between 'great friends' Trump and Modi. Lighthizer said that the Trump administration's strategy with India was to maintain good relations but to use what leverage it had to increase its access to India's market to 'obtain fairness and reciprocity in trade'. He also commented on what he thought of as Modi's personality and political vision. 'Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a particularly interesting figure. He came up through the ranks of right-wing political organizations and clearly considers himself a nationalist. His political party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, is a right-wing Hindu party.' He added: 'He is an extremely gifted politician and the first leader of India who was born after its independence in 1947… Of course, Modi is dedicated to raising India out of poverty. He believes in doing it through state control of innovation, high tariffs, mercantilism, and protectionism. There are lots of hangovers from the time of British rule, but free trade is not one of them.' High praise for Piyush Goyal Lighthizer was sworn in as the 18th US Trade Representative (USTR) in May 2017 and worked in the position till 20 January 2021. The USTR is responsible for developing and coordinating international trade, commodity, and direct investment policy, as well as overseeing negotiations with other countries. At the time he was chosen by Trump to serve as USTR, Lighthizer was a partner at the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP (Skadden), where he practised international trade law for over 30 years. Before joining Skadden, Lighthizer served as deputy USTR for US President Ronald Reagan. During this tenure, he negotiated over two dozen bilateral international agreements, including pacts on steel, automobiles, and agricultural products. The latest flashpoint in the recent India-US talks came last week when the US President signed an order imposing a 25 percent tariff on India's exports, 'plus an unspecified penalty' for buying Russian oil and weapons. In the 2023 book, Lighthizer also reflected on his time negotiating with the Indian delegation on tariffs. 'I said (to PM Modi) that I had been negotiating with their trade minister, Suresh Prabhu, for two years and had made absolutely no progress. At times, I said, he had not even returned my call for weeks.' 'Soon after that meeting, negotiations began in earnest. This time they were with a new trade minister named Piyush Goyal, a smart, gifted politician from Mumbai. We raised our issues: tariffs, agriculture access, medical device impediments, barriers to e-commerce and insurance, discrimination in the electronic payment sector, fish subsidies, and the list goes on. We made headway but could never quite close a deal.' (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read:Trump tariff forces India to shed illusion. Stop conflating status with power
Telegraph
29-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Peter Navarro in firing line over tariff chaos
The Manhattan-based Court of International Trade on Wednesday ruled that the US president overstepped his authority by imposing across-the-board duties on imports from nations that sell more to the United States than they buy. The court said the US Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to regulate trade with other countries and cannot be overridden by the president's emergency powers to safeguard the US economy. The administration won a temporary reprieve on Thursday with an appeals court temporarily blocking the previous ruling halting tariffs. Mr Trump has claimed broad authority to issue tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which is meant to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during a national emergency. Mr Navarro is understood to have counselled the president to use the IEEPA to implement the measures. The law, which Mr Trump is the first president to use to implement tariffs, has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the US or freeze their assets. A source close to the White House said Mr Navarro will face backlash over the decision from within Mr Trump's cabinet, potentially paving the way for him to be replaced by Robert Lighthizer, the president's former trade secretary. Mr Lighthizer sparked a trade war with Beijing during Mr Trump's first term by imposing tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese goods. The international trade lawyer was a key adviser to the president's 2024 campaign but was passed over for a cabinet position in the administration. Shortly after the court ruling, which quashes the tariffs Mr Trump imposed on Canada, Mexico and China, the White House filed a notice of appeal. 'We think we have a strong case. Yes, we will immediately appeal and try to stay the ruling,' Mr Navarro confirmed to Bloomberg. He added that the court ruling showed the White House could also use alternative legal methods to impose a baseline 10 per cent tariff and higher reciprocal duties on other countries. 'So nothing has really changed here in that sense... We are still, as we speak, having countries call us and tell us they want a deal,' Mr Navarro said. 'These deals are going to happen.' Mr Navarro served as a trade adviser during Mr Trump's 2016 election campaign and has long advocated for a radically protectionist trade policy. He spent four months in jail last year for contempt of Congress after he refused to cooperate with an investigation into the Jan 6 riots. Addressing the trade court's slap down, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, blamed the decision on 'activist judges' and called for the Supreme Court to intervene. The ruling was handed down by a three-judge panel, who were nominated to the court under the presidencies of Ronald Regan, Barack Obama and Mr Trump. 'There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision making process,' Ms Leavitt said. 'America cannot function if president Trump, or any other president for that matter, has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges.' She added: 'But ultimately, the Supreme Court must put an end to this for the sake of our Constitution.'
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
5 Times the Trump Team Told Americans To Accept Being Poorer
President Donald Trump made headlines this week when he seemed to suggest that American families might be able to afford fewer toys due to his trade policies. "Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls," Trump said on Wednesday, "and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally." That was Trump's most direct admission yet about the potential costs of his trade war—which could reduce the average household's income by nearly $3,800 this year, according to the Yale Budget Lab's estimates. But this was not a run-of-the-mill gaffe or another case of Trump saying the quiet part out loud. If anything, Trump was merely underlining a sentiment that's gained traction on the political right in recent years: that Americans should be forced to pay higher prices for basic goods and household items. Don't believe me? Here are four other recent incidents in which national conservatives in Trump's orbit admitted as much. Robert Lighthizer, August 2022 While speaking at the American Economic Forum, Trump's former U.S. Trade Representative dismissed free trade as being rooted in "a philosophy of consumption" that is too "materialistic." "The best way to fix consumerism is to raise prices," Lighthizer said. "Is consumption really a problem in America?" That might be easy to say as someone who has spent his career bouncing back and forth between law, politics, and finance—Lighthizer just landed a plush new gig as a "senior advisor" for Citigroup. For many Americans, however, higher prices would mean a material reduction in living standards. When Lighthizer criticizes "consumerism" and "consumption," he's really just saying that you should be happy with paying more and getting less. Maybe that's true for some people, but that's not something that a president or a presidential appointee should get to decide for you. Dan Bishop, April 2024 In remarks read into the congressional record, then-Rep. Dan Bishop (R–N.C.) decried the "cheap crap" that Americans were importing from China. "In just the last 2 years, roughly, Chinese online marketplaces have exploded in size, selling cheap goods at dumping prices into the American market," said Bishop, who is now the deputy director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. "You can go buy sneakers on Temu for $5, and a sweater for $7. Temu reportedly loses $30 per order in a deliberate strategy to flood the U.S. market with cheap crap." That sounds like a great deal for anyone who needs shoes and a sweater for less than the price of a decent sandwich. People who can afford to pay for better quality, more expensive goods are free to do so, but the idea that the government should force Americans to pay higher prices is elitist and wrong. If Bishop is right about Temu losing money on every order, then the market should solve this problem on its own. Only the government can get away with doing business that deep in the red. J.D. Vance, August 2024 Not long after being named Trump's running mate, then-Sen. J.D. Vance (R–Ohio) declared in a campaign speech that "a million cheap, knockoff toasters aren't worth the price of a single American manufacturing job." That's some bonkers arithmetic, as I wrote in a longer response at the time (which you can find here). Affordable and abundant labor-saving appliances are part of the reason that 21st-century America is the best place to live in the history of the human race. "A product being cheap in both senses—low cost and low quality—is not in and of itself a problem," writes Kevin Corcoran. "Sometimes, buying something inexpensive and basic is a perfectly sensible option!" But, again, what Vance was really saying is that you should be poorer. Ed Gresser, the former assistant U.S. Trade representative who is currently the director of trade and global markets for the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), crunched the numbers and determined that a fully American-made toaster would cost at least $250. That's significantly more expensive than the $30 and $50 toasters that are readily available in American stores today. Every dollar that you have to spend on a more expensive toaster is a dollar that can't be spent on something else. In Vance's world, that tradeoff is worth it because of patriotism (or because toaster-building jobs are good for your character), but that's a reality where people would feel significantly poorer. Scott Bessent, March 2025 While speaking to the Economic Club of New York, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declared that "access to cheap goods is not the essence of the American dream." Again, that might be easy for him to say. Bessent, who was a hedge fund manager before joining the Trump administration, has bought and sold multiple multimillion-dollar homes during his lifetime, as The Wall Street Journal reported. He likely has no problem paying a little extra for home decor. But what about people who are on an IKEA budget instead? Good luck to them, since the tariffs will hit nearly all of the Swedish retailer's affordable Scandinavian furnishings. "It's easy to decry cheap goods, or stuff," wrote Reason's Liz Wolfe in response to Bessent's remarks. "People express what they value through their stuff. Stuff is not the essence of the American dream, or the thing that makes life worthwhile, or what we'll be thinking of on our deathbeds, but it is an elemental building block that allows us to pursue all the other things that do give us meaning: That dinner party you hosted at which you were able to fete a friend or get to know a neighbor really did need plates." As the saying goes: When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time. The nationalist conservatives now running the Republican Party have said repeatedly that they believe Americans should have to pay higher prices for sneakers and household goods in order to achieve weird political goals like more toaster factories and textile mills. Now, with Trump's tariffs, they are showing their commitment to that premise. Trump says his tariffs will mean Americans won't be able to afford as many toys for their kids. That likely won't be where it ends. The post 5 Times the Trump Team Told Americans To Accept Being Poorer appeared first on
CBC
15-04-2025
- Business
- CBC
Three ways this Canada-U.S. dispute will end
Social Sharing You'd have to squint till your eyeballs ache, but there is a foreseeable scenario where Canada and the U.S. build a closer relationship out of this ugly moment. This outcome is far from certain — hence the squinting. But one influential figure in Washington professes to see it. Donald Trump's first-term trade czar predicted the optimistic scenario last week in Ottawa, speaking behind closed doors. "Whatever is going on now is not going to last, and it'll be fine," Robert Lighthizer told the Canada Strong and Free Network, a conservative think-tank, on a recording shared with CBC News. "The relationship between the United States and Canada is going to be as good or better than it has ever been and the business relationship will be fine." There are three broad potential scenarios after this month's federal election, after which Canada and the U.S. are poised to enter comprehensive trade and security negotiations. Call them the good place, the bad place and the messy middle. WATCH | Uncertainty over tariffs: Confusion reigns over Trump's tariff plans 1 day ago Duration 2:29 The good place? Economic security, military security — Canada gets both, with tariff-free trade restored and the U.S. defence umbrella intact. Canada could even gain new advantages, if the U.S. keeps its tariffs against other countries. Lighthizer hinted at this. He suggested Canada has gained a competitive edge amid the recent trade war as its tariffs are, generally, lower than those on most countries. Most products traded under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) have tariff exemptions, and Canada and Mexico did not get the same 10 per cent universal tariff as other countries. "My own analysis is that Canada is better off because [CUSMA] is more valuable than it was six weeks ago," Lighthizer said. He added a caveat. There are still tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum. He didn't mention tariffs on another massive industry, the auto sector, which is now caught in a tangle of exemptions and duties — a Swiss cheese of trade barriers. Which brings us to the messy middle. Bleak and bleaker scenarios It's the in-between scenario and it looks, frankly, like our present purgatory: a relationship corroded by doubt, eaten away by a tariff here and another one there. "I think [CUSMA] is on life support right now. And I think it will be like that for the next year — at least," Mexican economist Jesús Carrillo told a panel on Monday organized by the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think-tank. He predicted the trade pact will survive. Then again, in this messy, uncertain moment, where tariffs shift from day to day, who knows what tomorrow's trade reality will be? Let alone next year's. Just look at recent appearances by Lighthizer's successor, the current U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. In two days of hearings on Capitol Hill last week, he, too, referred to Canada and Mexico enjoying privileged access to the U.S. market, under CUSMA. WATCH | Car parts could be spared, Trump says: Trump says Canadian car parts among list of possible products spared from U.S. tariffs 12 hours ago Duration 6:26 Then again, he also talked about an advantage for the broader Western hemisphere. He said several times that textile production could move closer to home, as Latin American countries mostly had a tariff of 10 per cent, while it was quadruple that in most Asian countries. But his testimony was obsolete by the time he left the U.S. Capitol. While Greer was still on the witness stand, Trump eliminated that tariff differential, giving almost every country on Earth the same 10 per cent rate. And that's the messy middle. Our current unstable trading system, being scrambled from one minute to the next by an unpredictable U.S. president, with tariffs on certain products but not others; and it changes day to day. As Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon said, his voice rising: "What. Is. The. Plan? In the last week the White House has been all over the map." It could be worse. It could be a full-blown, ever-escalating crisis — the bad place. We already got glimpses of that between December and March. For about three months, Trump kept threatening Canada's economic and national survival, talking about immiserating it so severely it might plead to join the U.S. He's recently stopped talking about crushing Canada's economy, or forcing it to accept U.S. annexation, or referring to the prime minister as "governor." We'll know soon whether he intends to resume this, after this month's federal election, when it will become clear whether Trump has changed his tune or has been biting his tongue for fear of influencing the vote. Impediments to a quick deal In any case, it will take time to rebuild trust, says one Washington analyst. She likens the process to therapy — Canada and the U.S. will, first, need to air their grievances. "Right now things are very hot, and we need to give it some time to cool down so that there can be a reset," said Jamie Tronnes, executive director of the Center for North American Prosperity and Security. "Canada and the U.S. need some time to be able to come to the table and talk about the problems that we've had in the relationship." The U.S. has longstanding complaints about Canada's failure to meet its defence commitments, from the Arctic to military spending, she noted. Canada, meanwhile, has been angered by these tariffs. Several other factors could drag this out. For example, it might take over a year just to start reviewing the CUSMA, if the U.S. follows its own legal processes for the renegotiation. In theory, the U.S. could scale back tariffs while negotiating. "The mechanisms to change [CUSMA] are not clear," said Carillo, who wondered whether Trump will follow the formal process or seek a quicker deal. Delays could get worse thanks to a personnel issue: the U.S. trade team is stretched thin. They're juggling talks with dozens of countries — and Greer has been wearing multiple hats, holding different interim roles in the White House. When negotiations begin, the priorities are no mystery. Canada's chief goal? Build legal guardrails to stop Trump from firing off tariffs at will — something a few U.S. lawmakers also favour. It's a tall order. Trump won't be keen to surrender his go-to weapon. After all, he just threatened more tariffs against Mexico, in a dispute over water. He's also studying tariffs on semiconductors and pharmaceuticals. What the Americans want most The U.S. has several objectives. It's unhappy with Canada's digital services tax. It will either seek adjustments to, or the end of, the supply-management system for dairy, eggs and poultry. But its top priority? Scrubbing foreign parts from U.S. manufacturing — especially Chinese steel and auto components, although it could go farther. Lighthizer was vague on the details in his Ottawa talk, but he called this priority No. 1. Autoss are "the biggest thing," he said. "I hope we tighten it even more." But he raised another sore spot. Tellingly, he veered off his usual trade lane to take a jab at Canada over defence spending. Canada "does not pay its share.… It just doesn't," he said. "And that has to be addressed." Those are likely the broad themes. The U.S. will seek changes on autos, dairy, digital taxes, defence spending, and, just maybe, based on recent sniping from Trump, looser banking regulations. Canada's top priority? Stability. It may chase extra deals — think softwood lumber — but the main goal is locking in old ties in a world that's anything but stable. "I think we get to the good place eventually," Tronnes said. She added a caveat, with a touch of graphic imagery. CUSMA 'is still alive. It is like, you know, many have said it's under a guillotine right now, just waiting to be sliced apart. But I'm optimistic."
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Lighthizer expects Japan to link tariffs, steel deal
A godfather of President Donald Trump's tariffs said on a private call with Wall Street investors that the US should quickly strike a trade deal with Japan, whose officials he expected to explicitly link White House support for the sale of US Steel to any talks. Robert Lighthizer, who was Trump's first-term trade czar and remains an influential voice in trade policy even without a role in this administration, spoke Monday to clients of Citigroup, according to participants. 'We should strike a deal with them,' Lighthizer said of Japan, which he called a 'great' trading partner. Lighthizer opposes the sale of US Steel to Tokyo-based Nippon, but told the group he would be 'flabbergasted' if Japan didn't try to make its approval a condition of any trade deal. In a statement to Semafor, he said: 'I am against this deal and do not think it is in our national interest.' Lighthizer is a China hawk who served as US Trade Representative from 2017 to 2021. His insights have been a hot commodity in recent weeks as the White House sends conflicting signals and the retaliatory math gets more complicated. Current USTR Jamieson Greer was Lighthizer's chief of staff during the first Trump administration, and the pair are former law-firm colleagues. Politico reported Friday that Lighthizer, in a private speech to Canadian conservatives, urged them to increase defense spending as a way to repair the country's fraught relationship with Trump. 'Nippon Steel are not a bunch of boy scouts,' Lighthizer said in 2023, shortly after the deal was announced. As a lawyer at Skadden, he helped US Steel fight imports of cheap steel from, among others, Nippon. Citi declined to agreed in 2023 to buy US Steel for $14 billion. Trump has threatened to block the deal on national security grounds, but it is seen as a pawn in trade talks that have already begun. The Japanese company, which has the support of US Steel's union, has also offered — separately, or together as part of any takeover — to invest billions of dollars upgrading US Steel's technology, which it says will help the company compete globally. This weekend brought a bleak warning for what might happen if it can't: The British government was forced to step in and nationalize the UK's last steel plant, which was sold to a Chinese company in 2020 and had been losing the equivalent of $920,000 every day.'The difference between acquisition and investment must be carefully examined in light of the U.S. law, but there must surely be a point where it (U.S. Steel) remains as an American company, and where Japanese interests can also be realized,' Ishiba told Japan's Parliament in Monday remarks translated by Reuters. Sign in to access your portfolio
