logo
Japan's trade negotiator to visit US to press for swift implementation of auto tariff deal

Japan's trade negotiator to visit US to press for swift implementation of auto tariff deal

The US has agreed to a trade deal with Japan to lower existing tariffs on Japanese automobile imports to 15%. (EPA Images pic)
TOKYO : Japan's top tariff negotiator Ryosei Akazawa said he planned to visit Washington from today to press the US to have President Donald Trump sign an executive order to bring an agreed 15% tariff rate on automobiles into effect.
The US last month agreed in a trade deal with Japan to lower existing tariffs on Japanese automobile imports to 15% from levies totaling 27.5% previously.
Duties that were due to come into effect on other Japanese goods will also be cut to 15% from 25%.
'We will push the US to make sure that an executive order is signed on the agreed tariff on automobiles and automotive components as soon as possible,' Akazawa told parliament.
Referring to the problem of 'stacking', where goods can be affected by multiple tariffs, Akazawa also said Japan wants to make sure that goods that are already levied at more than 15% would be exempt from the additional 15% rate.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Exclusive-Trump administration to formally axe Elon Musk's 'five things' email
Exclusive-Trump administration to formally axe Elon Musk's 'five things' email

The Star

time6 minutes ago

  • The Star

Exclusive-Trump administration to formally axe Elon Musk's 'five things' email

FILE PHOTO: Nov 16, 2024; New York, NY, USA; President-elect Donald Trump talks with Elon Musk (right) during UFC 309 at Madison Square Garden. Mandatory Credit: Brad Penner-Imagn Images/File Photo WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The Trump administration plans as soon as Tuesday to formally axe a program launched by billionaire former Trump adviser Elon Musk requiring federal employees to summarize their five workplace achievements from the prior week, two people familiar with the matter said. The Office of Personnel Management, the federal human resources agency that implemented Musk's push to slash the federal workforce, plans to announce the end of the "five things" email to HR representatives across the federal government later on Tuesday, the two people said, declining to be named because the matter was not public. While many federal agencies had already phased out compliance with the weekly email, the move, not previously reported, signals the Trump administration is turning the page on one of Musk's most unpopular initiatives following a dramatic row between the two men in early June. The White House and OPM did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Musk, who spent over a quarter of a billion dollars to help Trump win November's presidential election, led the Department of Government Efficiency's efforts to slash the budget and cut the federal workforce until his departure in May to refocus on his tech empire. Musk initially received a warm White House sendoff from Trump, but then incurred the president's wrath by describing Trump's tax cut and spending bill as an abomination. Trump pulled the nomination of Musk ally and tech entrepreneur Jared Isaacman to lead NASA and later threatened to cancel billions of dollars worth of federal contracts with Musk's companies after the blowup between the two men. The "five things" email, launched by Musk in February to boost accountability, sparked tensions with department chiefs who were blindsided by the weekend email mandating the move. It also fueled confusion among government workers who received mixed messages about whether and how to comply. Reuters reported in March that the White House installed two Trump loyalists at OPM to ensure better policy coordination between the White House and the agency. Scott Kupor, a venture capitalist who took the helm at OPM in July, foreshadowed the end of the initiative last month, describing processing of the weekly response emails as "very manual" and "not efficient." It is "something that we should look at and see, like, are we getting the value out of it that at least the people who put it in place thought they were," he said. (Reporting by Alexandra Alper; Editing by Sally Buzbee and Rod Nickel)

Brexit's parallels with Trump tariffs tell a tale
Brexit's parallels with Trump tariffs tell a tale

New Straits Times

time3 hours ago

  • New Straits Times

Brexit's parallels with Trump tariffs tell a tale

In figuring out why the United States tariff shock hasn't sent the economy or financial world into a tailspin, Britain's exit from the European Union trade bloc provides something of a playbook — and without a particularly happy ending. Aside from vast differences in economic scale and global reach, the two episodes bear some comparison in how they upended years of deeply integrated free trade and possibly in how business, the economy at large and financial markets reacted. The 2016 Brexit referendum and Trump's tariffs this year were each widely billed as economic shocks that would send the financial world into paroxysms. They didn't, at least not at the outset. To be sure, both were followed by dramatic downward lurches in the two countries' currencies. But, to some extent, the steep drop in sterling after the referendum vote and the dollar's plunge on President Donald Trump's tariff plan this year helped offset some of the wider impact, at least on stock markets that are loaded with global firms with outsized foreign revenue. More broadly, however, the difficulty in isolating their immediate net impact means no "big bang" economic crisis unfolds to prove critics right, even if their enduring legacy turns out to be a slow burn of economic potential and lost output, often obscured by multiple other crosswinds. In Britain's case, the seismic effects of the Covid-19 pandemic distorted any attempt to easily assess Brexit when it actually happened. Tortuous negotiations with the EU meant the UK's departure eventually occurred on the eve of the health crisis in 2020 and the new trade rules did not come into force until a year later. But in the four years between the referendum surprise and the pandemic, the UK economy never entered a recession nor recorded a negative quarterly GDP print — confounding pro-EU supporters at the time and bolstering the Brexit lobby. Emerging from the twin hits, however, the economy has almost flatlined since. What's more, it's taken more than eight years for the pound's effective exchange rate to recover its pre-referendum levels. Few mainstream economists now doubt that Brexit has taken a serious toll on the UK economy. One academic study by a number of Bank of England economists earlier this year concluded that uncertainty following the referendum resulted in little change in goods exports and imports before the exit was finalised. But after the new rules hit, UK imports fell three per cent and overall exports fell 6.4 per cent, largely because of the 13 per cent hit in exports to the EU. While this slump seems relatively modest compared with the official forecasts of the longer-term hit, the pain has been borne disproportionately by small businesses. And the cumulative damage to London and the service sector over the next 10 years continues to worry the City. The US tariff story is of a completely different order, of course, as it will reverberate across the world economy. But there are some parallels, not least in certain aspects of the market reactions and the initial resilience. Economists estimate that the tariffs could lop anywhere from 0.5 per cent to one per cent off US gross domestic product over time. That's a US$150 billion to US$300 billion hit, which, though painful, would not be an instant crisis for an economy that's growing at a roughly two per cent annualised rate, where imported goods represent just 11 per cent of GDP and where tech and AI trends are generating considerable tailwinds. But as former White House economic adviser Jason Furman said in a New York Times essay last week, the tariff damage is likely not a one-off hit. The loss of 0.5 per cent of GDP, he argued, is "the equivalent of every household in America taking around US$1,000 and lighting it on fire, then doing it again every year. Forever." In the end, the main point of the British comparison is to show how extreme partisan arguments on the pros or cons of such giant economic policy changes don't necessarily get resolved cleanly in adaptive, hardy and hyper-complex economies. The latest YouGov opinion poll shows 56 per cent of Britons now think it was wrong to leave the EU, some nine years after their narrow vote to leave. The jury on Trump's tariffs is still out.

Russia hints at deploying mid-range missiles after ending INF moratorium
Russia hints at deploying mid-range missiles after ending INF moratorium

The Sun

time4 hours ago

  • The Sun

Russia hints at deploying mid-range missiles after ending INF moratorium

MOSCOW: Russia on Tuesday suggested it could deploy intermediate-range missiles after ending a self-imposed moratorium on producing or deploying the weapons, which were banned for decades under a Cold War treaty with the United States. Washington and Moscow had prohibited missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometres (300-3,400 miles) under the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. But US President Donald Trump withdrew from the deal during his first term in 2019, accusing Russia of failing to comply. The Kremlin said at the time it would continue to abide by a moratorium if the United States did not deploy missiles within striking distance of Russia. Russia's foreign ministry said Monday it was ending the self-imposed restrictions, with the Kremlin hinting on Tuesday that Moscow could soon deploy the previously-banned missiles. 'There are no longer any restrictions in Russia in this regard. Russia no longer considers itself limited in any way,' President Vladimir Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, told reporters. Moscow was 'entitled, if necessary, to take appropriate measures' on the deployment of the missiles, he said, adding that there would be no public announcement if Russia decided to station the missiles. Putin said last year Russia should start producing mid-range missiles -- capable of carrying nuclear warheads -- after the United States sent some launch systems to Denmark for training exercises. Russia has also accused the United States of sending the systems to the Philippines and Australia for drills. 'The United States and its allies have not only openly outlined plans to deploy American land-based INF missiles in various regions, but have also already made significant progress in the practical implementation of their intentions,' Russia's foreign ministry said in a statement. The move comes after Trump announced the deployment of two nuclear submarines 'in the region' amid an online row with Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's former president. Medvedev on Monday said Russia's foes should be on standby. 'This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with. Expect further steps,' he said in his first social media post since the row with Trump erupted. - AFP

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store