Talks to finalise US steel tariff exemption ongoing as deadline due to pass
President Donald Trump has said he plans to start implementing tariffs on the US's trade partners on July 9.
The UK has already managed to negotiate a deal with the US which eliminates the threat of tariffs for British car and aeroplane manufacturers.
But a reprieve for the steel industry is yet to be finalised, leaving open the threat that the current 25% tariff rate could rise to 50% after the deadline.
Mr Trump is reportedly stepping up pressure on countries who could soon be subject to the tariffs, urging them to negotiate trade deals with the US.
But amid signs of confusion within the US administration, trade secretary Howard Lutnick has suggested America's trade partners will see the levies begin on August 9, after receiving a letter outlining them on July 9.
Mr Trump told his cabinet that negotiating trade deals was 'too time-consuming' so he was sending out letters to countries detailing tariff rates.
In a post on Truth Social on Tuesday night, he said letters to 'a minimum of 7 Countries' would be released on Wednesday morning with more in the afternoon, although he gave no indication of which countries would be receiving the letters.
Gareth Stace, director general at industry body UK Steel, said: 'A swift and positive resolution is needed to safeguard jobs, unlock growth, and restore confidence in the UK steel sector.'
Downing Street said on Tuesday that discussions are ongoing between UK and US officials to secure 0% tariffs on core steel imports to the US.
A Number 10 spokesman said: 'As we've said before, this is something that we continue to discuss with the US, just as we did with aero and auto, and those discussions will continue.'
Asked if the Government understands the frustration of British steel workers, he said they want to see the deal in force 'as soon as possible'.
The spokesman added: 'We obviously want to see this deal in force as soon as possible. That remains our priority.
'But as we've said before and set out, the Government remains relentlessly focused on making sure British businesses can feel the benefits of the deal as soon as possible.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
10 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump sued by US states over withholding $6.8 billion for schools
July 14 (Reuters) - A coalition of mostly Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging a move by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration to withhold about $6.8 billion in congressionally approved federal funding for K-12 schools. Attorneys general or governors from 24 states and the District of Columbia sued in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, arguing that the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of Management and Budget threw schools nationwide into chaos by unconstitutionally freezing funding for six programs approved by Congress. The freeze extended to funding used to support the education of migrant farm workers and their children; recruitment and training of teachers; English proficiency learning; academic enrichment; and after-school and summer programs. The administration also froze funding used to support adult literacy and job-readiness skills. The government was legally required to release the money to the states by July 1, the lawsuit said. Instead, the Education Department notified states on June 30 that it would not be issuing grant awards under those programs by that deadline. It cited the change in administration as its reason. An OMB spokesperson at the time cited an "ongoing programmatic review" of education funding and said initial findings showed what he termed as a misuse of grant funds to "subsidize a radical leftwing agenda." OMB also raised objections to the use of the grant money to support scholarships for immigrant students and lessons that involved LGBTQ themes. The Democratic-led states said the sweeping funding freeze has disrupted school systems, resulting in summer school and after-school programs being canceled or put at risk and the halting of other initiatives with little time for school districts to fill in the holes left in their budgets. The states say the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by disregarding Congress' sole authority over spending and ran afoul of federal administrative law by freezing the funds without any reasoned explanation. The states also say the administration failed to abide by procedures of the Impoundment Control Act, which bars the executive branch from unilaterally refusing to spend funds appropriated by Congress unless certain steps are followed. The lawsuit follows a series of other cases Democratic-led states and others have filed challenging the administration's sweeping efforts to freeze or terminate federal funding for programs out of line with Trump's agenda.
Powys County Times
12 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Mass protests planned in London and Windsor for Trump's state visit
Anti-Trump campaigners are to stage a mass demonstration in central London on the first day of the US president's state visit to the UK. The Stop Trump Coalition is also planning further protests, including one near Windsor Castle, during Donald Trump's high profile trip in two months' time. Buckingham Palace confirmed on Monday that the King is to host the controversial American leader at the Berkshire royal residence from September 17-19, when he will be feted with a ceremonial welcome and a state banquet. The trip will be Mr Trump's second state visit to the UK – an unprecedented gesture for a US president – with his last one in 2019 seeing thousands of people turn out on the streets in London in opposition. A 20ft Trump baby blimp also took to the skies above Parliament Square, just as it did during a previous visit by the billionaire-turned politician in 2018. The Stop Trump Coalition has yet to confirm whether the famous inflatable effigy, which depicts the US president as an angry baby in a nappy clutching a mobile phone, will make a reappearance, but urged people to 'keep your eyes on the skies'. The original was donated to the Museum of London in 2021. Other inventive creations by protesters in 2019 included a 16ft talking robot of Mr Trump sitting on a gold toilet, which said the phrases 'No collusion', 'You are fake news' and 'I'm a very stable genius' in audio of Mr Trump's own voice; and Handmaids Against Trump – women draped in red with white hoods in homage to Margaret Atwood's dystopian novel about a crackdown on reproductive rights. On September 17 – the first day of Mr Trump's visit – demonstrators will assemble at London's Embankment at 2pm and march to a 5pm rally at an as-yet-undisclosed location. Further protests, including one near Windsor Castle, are set to be confirmed once more details of Mr Trump's visit is known. Security is expected to be at peak levels for the American leader, who survived an assassination attempt last year. The Stop Trump Coalition's spokesperson Seema Syeda said: 'This will be a massive protest against Trump's state visit. 'Trump and his authoritarian politics are not welcome here. Keir Starmer should not be rolling out the red carpet for Trump. 'They are already running scared. They have chosen the first possible date that stops Trump from being able to address Parliament. 'We know that Trump is deeply unpopular with the public. 'We mobilised hundreds of thousands of people against Trump during his first term, and he has only got worse since then. 'We are working at speed to bring together all the movements – for democracy, for equality, against climate change, for a free Palestine – to show our unity against Trump.' Asked about the Trump effigy, she said: 'Will Trump Baby be back? You'll have to keep your eyes on the skies.' The House of Commons will not be sitting at the time of Mr Trump's visit as it will be in recess for party conference season, meaning the president will not be able to address Parliament as French President Emmanuel Macron did during his state visit last week. However, the House of Lords will be sitting. Nick Dearden, director of Global Justice Now which is part of the coalition, accused Mr Trump of being a bully and suggested there was a growing global resistance against him. 'Trump is engaged in economic warfare against both friend and foe,' he said. 'He's bullying countries, including the UK, to give in to the demands of American multinational corporations. 'And he's taking his own country down an increasingly fascist path – crushing the rights of Americans, ignoring the courts, threatening the media and universities.' Mr Dearden added: 'Why on earth would we want to accord this man a second state visit? 78% of Britons have a negative view of Trump, and with good reason. 'If Starmer won't stand up to Trump, we will – by taking to the streets as part of the growing global resistance against Trump and the oligarchs that surround him.'
BreakingNews.ie
21 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
TikTok given permission to challenge €530m fine over transfer of personal data to China
Social media giant TikTok has been granted permission by the High Court to mount a legal challenge against what it argues is the "penal" €530 million fine imposed upon it by the Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) over the alleged transfer of site-users' personal data to China. The fine was imposed on the video-sharing site last April, for what the DPC described as an infringement on data protection regarding its transfers of European users' data to The People's Republic of China via remote access to data stored in the US and Singapore by personnel based in China. Advertisement In addition to the €530 million fine, the April 30th censure also included an order suspending TikTok's transfer of data to China if its processing was not brought into compliance with European directives on transparency within six months. At the High Court on Monday, Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty granted permission for TikTok to pursue a legal challenge against the DPC decisions and put a stay on them pending the outcome of the legal review. The High Court action is being taken by TikTok Technology Limited, with an address at The Sorting Office, Ropemaker Place, Dublin 2, and by TikTok Information Technologies UK Limited, Kaleidoscope, Lindsey Street, London, UK, against the DPC, Ireland and the Attorney General. TikTok Ireland is a private company limited by shares incorporated in the Republic of Ireland and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of TikTok UK. Advertisement Both TikTok entities seek the quashing of the decision of the DPC of April 30th, 2025. Lawyers for the applicants appeared in the High Court on an ex parte basis, where only one side is represented. They submitted that the sections of the Data Protection Act under which the DPC made their decision are invalid when viewed in relation to the Constitution, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. In papers lodged to the High Court, TikTok says that the Ireland and UK arms are "joint controllers" for the processing of personal data of users based in Europe but add that TikTok UK is "the entity that will ultimately bear the cost of the administration fines imposed in the decision". Advertisement Ireland and the Attorney General are joined as respondents to the proceedings. TikTok submits that the imposition of "administrative" fines of €485 million and €45 million 'constitutes the imposition of a sanction that in its nature and severity is properly characterised as 'criminal' or penal'. TikTok contends that 'even if the imposition of the fine did not constitute a sanction of a criminal nature, the DPC was nonetheless not exercising merely limited functions and powers of a judicial nature within the meaning of Article 37.1 of the Constitution'. Article 37.1 aims to validate the delegation of certain judicial powers to administrative bodies without infringing on the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts in criminal matters. Advertisement TikTok claims that the fines 'cannot be said to be of a limited nature'. Ireland Mother (54) should never have been convicted of se... Read More TikTok submits that the ECHR provides that 'in the determination of civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charges, an individual is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law'. The applicants further claim that the fine 'constitutes an interference with the applicants' right to private property protected under Article 40.3 or 43, or both, of the Constitution". 'The decision to impose a fine, the amount of the fine and the absence of a full right of appeal constitutes an unjust, unjustified and disproportionate interference with the applicants' right to private property," TikTok claims. Ms Justice Gearty granted leave for the judicial review and adjourned the matter to October.
