Trump prepares tariff notice as US trade partners scramble for deals
Advertisement
'I signed some letters and they'll go out on Monday – probably 12,' Trump told reporters over the Fourth of July weekend, adding that the missives involve 'different amounts of money, different amounts of tariffs and somewhat different statements.'
Asked to identify the countries, he said, 'I have to announce it on Monday.'
Trump's latest remarks suggest talks remain fluid and deals elusive, three days before the July 9 deadline announced by the US administration.
The letters initially were supposed to go out on July 4 with a tariff imposition date of August 1, based on Trump's earlier comments. But US officials were busily negotiating through the holiday weekend, including with Japan, South Korea, the European Union, India and Vietnam.
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung delivers a speech on the second supplementary budget proposal for 2025 at the National Assembly in Seoul, South Korea, on June 26. Photo: Reuters
One of Trump's signature moves in deal making is a unilateral threat when negotiations reach critical stages, so it's unclear whether the letters he describes are real or merely meant to strike fear into trading partners still reluctant to offer last-minute concessions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
30 minutes ago
- South China Morning Post
Hong Kong manufacturers brace for higher costs as end of trade truce looms
A recent surge in Hong Kong's exports masks a grim reality for frontline manufacturers, with some facing a sharp drop-off in new orders and bracing for renewed pressure on costs as a 90-day tariff truce between Washington and Beijing ends on Tuesday. Advertisement Bryant Chan Wan-sing, president of toymaker the Wynnewood Corporation, said the sharp increase in orders during the truce was essentially a reinstatement of ones put on hold or cancelled when tariffs were introduced on US President Donald Trump's so-called Liberation Day on April 2. 'We have maximised what we can produce and ship during this 90-day window already. Any orders received before Liberation Day that cannot be shipped during the truce will remain on hold for now,' Chan said. 'We are not seeing additional new orders either. So there is indeed a sharp contrast post-truce period, one that is similar to [the] pre-truce period.' Hong Kong exports surged by 15.5 per cent in May from a year ago, with economists attributing the increase to the front-loading of shipments by businesses racing to beat the deadline. Advertisement 'Our company remains financially challenged with exposure to material cancellation or orders that continue to be put on hold,' Chan said.
South China Morning Post
an hour ago
- South China Morning Post
Inside Southeast Asia's booming trade in fakes that the US hates
Persistence is the lifeblood of the counterfeit trade – an attribute Rahul* has in spades. Advertisement On the bustling, neon-lit streets of Bangkok, the thirty-something from India hawks imitation Rolex watches with a practised ease. 'This is nearly as good as the real one,' he says, grinning, before melting into the crowd, a bag of replica Swiss timepieces slung over his shoulder. His trade is illegal, yet it flourishes out in the open – a mere ripple in Southeast Asia's ocean of counterfeit goods. Now, that ocean is in the crosshairs of Washington, which is leveraging the region's persistent intellectual property violations in the tense final days of trade negotiations. Trump's White House has imposed a July 9 deadline: if trade talks fail, then on Wednesday Southeast Asia's export-driven economies could face punishing tariffs of up to 49 per cent. The primary target is Chinese goods diverted through neighbouring countries – a practice known as transshipment that helps Chinese products sidestep Washington's existing tariffs.
South China Morning Post
3 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
Future of Science and Technology Agreement is a bellwether for US-China ties: Denis Simon
Denis Simon is one of the leading experts on US-China science and technology cooperation as well as China's innovation system. He has held senior roles including executive vice-chancellor at Duke Kunshan University and director of the US-China programme at Pennsylvania State University. He is teaching a graduate course on China science and technology policy at the Schwarzman College at Tsinghua University in Beijing. This interview first appeared in SCMP Plus . For other interviews in the Open Questions series, click here Can you explain the core elements of the STA and its role in fostering scientific collaboration between the US and China? Why is it considered a cornerstone of bilateral relations, and what makes it so politically and strategically sensitive, especially in today's geopolitical climate? The US-China Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement (STA), first signed in 1979 during the [Jimmy] Carter administration, is the foundational legal and diplomatic framework governing official S&T cooperation between the two nations. Its core elements include government-to-government cooperation via ministries, agencies, and labs; institutional and academic exchanges, supporting researcher mobility and joint projects; joint working groups on specific fields like health, agriculture, energy and environmental science; and mechanisms for sharing data, coordinating funding and protecting intellectual property. It is considered a cornerstone of bilateral relations because of its highly symbolic value as the first formal and peaceful engagement between the US and China after normalisation. At a time when diplomatic ties were still fragile, scientific cooperation provided politically 'safe' ground to build trust. Its overall impact has been immense – it made science diplomacy real. In the current geopolitical climate, the STA sits at the intersection of national security concerns (e.g., espionage, IP theft, cybersecurity), economic competitiveness (particularly in AI, life sciences, semiconductors) and techno-nationalism (growing on both sides). The very openness that once made the STA a success is now seen by some as a vulnerability. Current discussions of the STA evoke debates not just about science but about how much the US should engage with a so-called strategic competitor. During a delegation visit to Beijing in the mid-2000s, I was part of a round table where a US scientist shared breakthrough research in clean coal technology. The Chinese side responded with enthusiastic interest, proposing a joint pilot project. The US delegation, however, hesitated – concerned that the technology might be commercialised without reciprocal IP protection. The moment highlighted both the promise and peril of STA-enabled openness. Fortunately, an agreement called CERC (Clean Energy Research Centre) was signed and it contained a detailed addendum regarding the disposition of any new intellectual capital developed under the programme.
