If you thought President Donald Trump’s trade war was over, he has some news for you: Tariffs are going up again. At the conclusion of his Middle East trip Friday, Trump acknowledged that trade negotiations are progressing too slowly to accommodate every country that wants to strike a new trade deal with the United States. So Trump said he’d give other countries a few more weeks, and then Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick would simply tell America’s trading partners what their new tariffs are. “We have, at the same time, 150 countries that want to make a deal, but you’re not able to see that many countries,” Trump said during a business roundtable in Abu Dhabi Friday. “So at a certain point, over the next two to three weeks, I think Scott and Howard will be sending letters out, essentially telling people – we’ll be very fair – but we’ll be telling people what they’ll be paying to do business in the United States.” Trump on April 9 paused his massive so-called reciprocal tariffs, which he announced on what he called “Liberation Day” on April 2. The reprieve was supposed to be for 90 days, to allow countries to negotiate with the administration. Trump officials have said around 100 countries have offered to negotiate deals, setting a tremendously difficult task before US trade negotiators to race against the clock to make new commitments. Without those negotiated deals, Trump could impose reciprocal tariffs – some of which are as high as 50%. The tariffs aren’t technically reciprocal, and many smaller countries with large trade gaps with the United States would end up with significant tariff burdens. “I guess you could say they could appeal it, but for the most part I think we’re going to be very fair, but it’s not possible to meet the number of people that want to see us,” Trump said. Trump has floated a similar idea before, albeit on a timeframe that has since elapsed. On April 23, in the Oval Office, Trump said his administration would “set the tariff” for countries that fail to negotiate new terms in the following few weeks. “In the end, I think what’s going to happen is we’re going to have great deals, and by the way, if we don’t have a deal with a company or a country, we’re going to set the tariff,” Trump said last month. “I’d say over the next couple of weeks, wouldn’t you say? I think so. Over the next two, three weeks. We’ll be setting the number.” So far, the Trump administration has managed to announce two new frameworks for trade negotiations that resulted in lower tariffs or lower trade barriers with other countries. The first was with the United Kingdom, announced earlier this month, and the second was with China, which Bessent and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer negotiated in Geneva last weekend. Trump’s negotiators have said they are in active discussions with a dozen or so countries, and Trump has said he is close to announcing several more agreements. The administration has previously said India and Japan are getting close to a framework of a deal, as is South Korea, although a new government is coming in there, which will delay negotiations. The new tariffs It’s not clear what new tariffs Trump will set on countries that are unable to strike a deal with the United States in the coming weeks – and whether those new tariffs will permanently supersede the paused reciprocal tariffs or merely serve as an interim tariff while negotiations continue. In the meantime, the United States maintains a 10% universal tariff on virtually every good imported to America, plus higher rates for certain products. Although Lutnick and some other administration officials have described the 10% tariff as a “baseline,” Trump earlier this month rejected that notion, suggesting that US importers would pay a tariff of more than 10% to bring in goods from most countries. After announcing the framework for trade negotiations with the UK, Trump said other countries wouldn’t get such a good deal. Unlike the UK, whose tariff was set at 10%, other countries will pay a higher rate, Trump said. That means tariffs will go higher than where they are today: according to Fitch Ratings, even with the 90-day reciprocal tariff pause, set to expire July 8, the United States maintains a 13% average tariff rate on imported goods. Although that’s lower than the 23% in effect last week, before the Trump administration agreed to lower tariffs on Chinese goods, it’s way higher than the 2.3% average tariff rate from before Trump took office for the second time. They could go much higher: Trump last month said he’d declare “total victory” if import taxes were as high as 50% a year from now. Trump’s back-and-forth stance on tariffs has caused incredible uncertainty for businesses and consumers, and mainstream economists say the chances of a US recession – though falling as Trump has backed off many of his most aggressive trade policies – are roughly a coin flip. It has also rattled markets, sending stocks tumbling before they rebounded over the past several weeks as Trump has expressed openness to negotiations on trade. Where are the deals? Trump has previously said his administration is rapidly constructing scores of deals that could make trade with other nations fairer and bring manufacturing back to the United States. “You have to understand, I’m dealing with all the companies, very friendly countries. We’re meeting with China. We’re doing fine with everybody. But ultimately, I’ve made all the deals,” Trump said in a Time interview last month. “I’ve made 200 deals.” Trump said in the interview, conducted in late April, that he would announce those deals “over the next three to four weeks.” That same week, Trump said he’d announce those deals in two to three weeks’ time. Despite Trump and his administration’s rhetoric, actual trade deals take a lot of time – often years – to hash out. They typically involve incredibly complex agreements, delving into the minutiae of various goods and nontariff barriers. They often involve significant political considerations, as various parties seek to protect voters with special interests. So Trump’s concession Friday that hundreds or even dozens of deals aren’t possible on such a short timeframe shows the limitations of threatening tariffs in order to achieve rapid concessions from trading partners with their own vested interests. In the meantime, Americans will be paying more for goods that aren’t made in the United States.
Trump says the clock is ticking for 150 countries to make a deal or face higher tariffs
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Trump Signals Increased Tariffs for Countries Failing to Reach Trade Agreements"
CNN
6.2
TruthLens AI Summary
President Donald Trump has announced a renewed escalation in his trade policies, indicating that tariffs will increase as negotiations with around 150 countries have not progressed quickly enough. During a business roundtable in Abu Dhabi, Trump stated that after a brief period of negotiation, his administration would soon communicate new tariff rates to trading partners who have not finalized agreements with the United States. Trump emphasized the urgency of the situation, noting that while many countries are eager to negotiate, the U.S. cannot accommodate all requests efficiently. He highlighted that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick would play pivotal roles in determining these tariffs, with some potentially reaching as high as 50%. The president reiterated that the tariffs are not technically reciprocal, meaning smaller nations could face disproportionately higher rates, further complicating the trade landscape.
Despite previous pauses on tariffs to facilitate negotiations, Trump’s administration has only managed to establish a few new frameworks for trade agreements, including those with the United Kingdom and China. However, uncertainties remain about the exact nature of the new tariffs and whether they would replace the paused reciprocal tariffs or simply act as interim measures. Current U.S. import tariffs average around 13%, significantly higher than rates before Trump took office, and the prospect of increased tariffs has raised concerns among economists about the potential impact on the U.S. economy. Trump's inconsistent stance on tariffs has created volatility in financial markets and uncertainty for businesses and consumers alike, with economists warning that the likelihood of a recession remains a significant risk. As the administration races against time to finalize deals, it faces the inherent complexities of trade negotiations that typically require extensive deliberation and political maneuvering, suggesting that the promised agreements may not materialize in the near term.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article presents an update on President Trump's trade policies, indicating that the trade war is far from over. With a looming deadline for negotiations with 150 countries, Trump emphasizes the urgency of reaching agreements to avoid increased tariffs. The tone suggests a firm stance on trade negotiations, reflecting Trump's approach to international relations and economic policy.
Objective of the Article
The intent behind this article appears to be to inform the public about the current state of trade negotiations under the Trump administration and to signal the potential for increased tariffs. By framing the situation as urgent, the article may aim to instill a sense of anticipation regarding trade relations and their implications for the economy.
Public Perception
This news piece could create mixed perceptions among the public. Supporters of Trump may view his insistence on fair trade as a strong leadership quality, while critics might interpret the impending tariffs as harmful to global trade relations and potentially detrimental to the U.S. economy. The framing of the article could evoke concerns about economic stability and international partnerships.
Potential Concealment
The article does not seem to directly hide information but focuses on the urgency of negotiations. However, it may underrepresent the complexities involved in trade agreements and the negative consequences tariffs could impose on consumers and businesses in the U.S.
Manipulative Elements
The article leans towards a manipulative narrative by emphasizing urgency and potential consequences of failing to negotiate deals. This could be perceived as a tactic to pressure countries into compliance or to rally domestic support for Trump's trade policies.
Truthfulness Assessment
While the factual basis of the article regarding Trump's statements and policies is credible, the interpretation and implications drawn may be skewed towards a particular viewpoint. The urgency expressed may not fully reflect the complexities of international trade negotiations.
Public Sentiment
The article seems to target individuals who are invested in U.S. economic policy, including business owners and voters concerned about trade. It may resonate more with those who support Trump's administration and its focus on America-first policies.
Impact on Financial Markets
This news could have potential implications for stock markets and global trade. Companies heavily reliant on international trade may see volatility in their stock prices in response to the announcement of increased tariffs. Sectors such as manufacturing and agriculture might be particularly affected.
Geopolitical Context
In terms of global power dynamics, the article highlights the ongoing tension between the U.S. and its trading partners. It underscores the transactional nature of Trump's foreign policy approach, which could reshape alliances and economic partnerships.
AI Involvement
While it is possible that AI was used in drafting or editing this article, the specific language and framing suggest a human editorial influence. AI models could have been employed to analyze data trends regarding trade policies, but the narrative structure seems to reflect human decision-making in journalism.
Manipulative Language
The language used in the article, particularly the urgency conveyed by phrases like "the clock is ticking," may serve as a manipulation tool to galvanize support for Trump's trade agenda, pushing the narrative that swift action is necessary.
In conclusion, the article serves to keep the public informed about the Trump administration's stance on international trade while potentially steering public opinion towards support for aggressive trade policies. The urgency and implications of raised tariffs are designed to provoke thought and concern among readers.