In a sudden turn of events in April, the American president, Donald Trump, rattled global markets by declaring the ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs on a multitude of countries. Once again he sprang a surprise by instituting a three-month suspension on the tariffs, purposed to provide a duration for countries to haggle mutual trade deals. Implicit in Trump’s decree was the July 9 deadline for the countries to negotiate and finalize trade agreements with the US. High-ranking officials of the Trump administration pledged to ‘achieve 90 deals in 90 days’. But the question that looms large is – what is the actual number of successful deals secured?
Scrutinizing the progress, one can see that Trump, despite his strident rhetoric, has only been able to finalize a small number of deals. The initial among these is a compact agreement with the United Kingdom, concluded last month, which has interestingly been described as a ‘mini-deal’. However, the tariffs on British steel and aluminium are still up in the air. In addition to this, Trump had initiated tariffs on various steel and aluminium products such as gym gear, furniture, and machinery.
Negotiations regarding pharmaceutical products’ tariffs between the countries still have an uncertain conclusion. Subsequently, there is an agreement with China, which seems like an effort to save face. Preliminary discussions took place in May in Geneva, providing both nations a window of 90 days to pause tariffs while in pursuit of a more comprehensive deal. However, most details concerning this arrangement are still under the wraps.
In the larger picture, it will be an interesting development to see whether these two global economic powerhouses can eventually broker a substantial trade deal. Furthering the string of events, Trump declared a trade agreement with Vietnam on a recent Thursday. Nevertheless, his caveat made it clear that ‘trans-shipping’ often remains amorphous and over-politicized in the course of trade enforcement.
Currently, the extent to which Vietnamese officials might be able to flag and prevent illicit re-routing is shrouded in ambiguity. Concurrently, negotiations with India are on the verge of completion. India’s negotiating team, engaged in intense deliberations with their American counterparts, still express several substantial concerns.
One of India’s principal objectives is to safeguard its dairy and agricultural sector. Meanwhile, the talks between the US and Canada have temporarily stumbled due to a controversial comment from Trump. He accused Canada’s Digital Services Tax (DST) of being a ‘direct attack’ on the United States.
On another front, the negotiations between the United States and Japan have reached an impasse over automotive trade – a key concern due to the US imposing a 25% tariff on this primary Japanese export. Interestingly, Japan had procured rice worth $298 million and approximately 16,000 cars from the US. Regardless, there isn’t an immediate likelihood of a deal with Tokyo.
Investigative studies have highlighted that the tariffs introduced by Trump could cause significant financial burden for US employers. A report published by JPMorganChase Institute estimates the cost to be somewhere around $82.3 billion. This potential impact would be most felt by companies with annual revenue ranging from $10 million to $1 billion. These companies form a notable fragment of the private sector workforce in the US.
Worryingly, the implications could be even more severe if the initial tariffs proposed by Trump had been left untouched. Supporting this notion, another study carried out by Goldman Sachs believes that companies will transfer at least 60% of their tariff costs onto the consumers.
From the perspective of many observers, Trump’s dramatic approach to handling tariffs is losing its initial surprise and becoming tedious. The question now is whether Trump can flip the script at this juncture or not.
These ongoing discussions highlight the complexities of international trade agreements and the difficulties faced by countries while navigating these complexities. The real-world implications of these tariffs and agreements extend far beyond the trade sector, affecting industries and individuals alike.
The strategic maneuvers and countermoves define the landscape of these trade wart and formulate a new global paradigm. However, only time will unravel the success or failure of Trump’s ambitious agenda to negotiate ’90 deals in 90 days’.
As the world eagerly anticipates the outcomes of these multilateral negotiations, the impacts they will have will indubitably reflect in the economic landscapes of the economies involved. Thus, the stakes in these negotiations are more astronomical than what meets the eye, involving millions of livelihoods relying on the outcomes.
The post Trump’s Ambitious ’90 Deals in 90 Days’: Hype or Hope? appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
