logo
Here we go again: latest Trump tariff deadline looms amid inflation concerns

Here we go again: latest Trump tariff deadline looms amid inflation concerns

The Guardiana day ago
When Donald Trump unveiled his 'liberation day' tariffs in the spring, only to pull the plug days later as panic tore through global markets, his officials scrambled to present the climbdown as temporary.
Three months of frenetic talks would enable the Trump administration to strike dozens of trade agreements with countries across the world, they claimed. 'We're going to run,' the White House trade adviser Peter Navarro told Fox Business Network. 'Ninety deals in 90 days is possible.'
The 90-day pause Trump ordered on his steep tariffs is almost up, and 90 deals have not materialized. The US is again on the brink of launching a trade assault against dozens of countries, with rates including 27% on Kazakhstan, 47% on Madagascar and 36% on Thailand.
'I'm not thinking about the pause,' the president claimed during a briefing with reporters earlier this week, when asked about Wednesday's deadline. 'I'll be writing letters to a lot of countries. And I think you're just starting to understand the process.'
Business leaders, lobbyists, economists and investors might disagree. Even officials in Trump's own administration have at times struggled to keep up. Another cliff edge has reared into view, forcing them to return to a familiar question: will he actually go through with this?
'I would suspect he's serious,' said Marc Busch, professor of international business diplomacy at Georgetown University. 'I think he's going to give a pass to the countries negotiating in good faith. But as of 9 July, a lot of the news will be big tariffs that the US hasn't seen since the 1930s are in effect.'
A handful of agreements have emerged, cooling some tensions. A partial deal with the UK was first to emerge, before a delicate truce with China, and a pact with Vietnam. Officials are also said to be closing in on a 'framework' arrangement with the EU.
But these breakthroughs have been significantly narrower than conventional free trade agreements, which can take years to hammer out. 'These aren't real trade deals. These are cessations of hostility,' said Busch. 'These are purchasing agreements that may or may not appease Trump for maybe a little while, thrown in with some aspirational stuff.'
Even if Trump extends the 90-day pause next week, or strikes myriad deals at breakneck pace, current tariff levels are still much higher than they were before his return to office. The effects of this are still filtering through to prices for US consumers.
'The US economy is definitely, I would say, breaking more to the positive than would have been the narrative, or the expectation, kind of right after liberation day,' said John Waldron, president of Goldman Sachs. 'There's still an expectation that we're going to see more inflation over the course of the summer.'
Mid-sized businesses in the US face an estimated $82.3bn in additional costs if the US maintains a 10% universal rate on all imports, as well as higher rates of 55% on China and 25% on Mexico and Canada, according to analysis by the JPMorganChase Institute.
Such firms 'often play a crucial role in regional economies and as part of larger supply chains', said analysts at the institute. 'If they struggle, it may cause ripple effects for other businesses and their communities.'
If the 'liberation day' tariffs are reimposed after the pause, costs would rise significantly. But even if they are not, the duties Trump has already introduced – and remain in force – are leaving companies with a hefty bill.
The administration's playbook, of hiking tariffs on a country dramatically and then cutting them back as a result of an agreement, is 'like a retailer that one day increases prices by 100% and another day announces a 30% sale', said Busch. 'It's quite extraordinary that we're still debating this issue,' he added. 'American businesses are already eating and passing on parts of these tariffs to consumers.'
No senior federal official has been more vocal about this reality than Jerome Powell, chair of the Federal Reserve, who – despite Trump's public demands and attacks – has kept US interest rates on hold while waiting to see how the administration's trade strategy pans out.
'Someone has to pay for the tariffs,' Powell said at a recent press conference, noting how the cost filters through a supply chain, from the initial manufacturer through to the customer buying a product. 'All through that chain, people will be trying not to be the ones who pick up the cost.
'But ultimately, the cost of the tariff has to be paid and some of it will fall on the end consumer. We know that. That's what businesses say. That's what the data says from past evidence. So we know that's coming.'
Trump does not see it this way, insisting that tariffs are taxes on other countries, rather than US businesses and consumers.
Whatever happens over the next few days, those attempting to take a longer-term view believe the main actions he has taken in recent months – like imposing blanket 10% tariffs – could remain in place for many years to come.
'We think it's likely that high and broad-based tariffs are here to stay because, of all the purported goals of trade policy, they're proving most successful at raising revenue,' said Michael Pearce, deputy chief US economist at Oxford Economics. 'Given the fiscal challenges that lie ahead, those revenues will be hard for future administrations to replace.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

If the US president threatens to take away freedoms, are we no longer free?
If the US president threatens to take away freedoms, are we no longer free?

The Guardian

time14 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

If the US president threatens to take away freedoms, are we no longer free?

Threats of retribution from Donald Trump are hardly a novelty, but even by his standards, the US president's warnings of wrathful vengeance in recent days have represented a dramatic escalation. In the past week, Trump has threatened deportation, loss of US citizenship or arrest against, respectively, the world's richest person, the prospective future mayor of New York and Joe Biden's former homeland security secretary. The head-spinning catalogue of warnings may have been aimed at distracting from the increasing unpopularity, according to opinion surveys, of Trump's agenda, some analysts say. But they also served as further alarm bells for the state of US democracy five-and-a-half months into a presidency that has seen a relentless assault on constitutional norms, institutions and freedom of speech. On Tuesday, Trump turned his sights on none other than Elon Musk, the tech billionaire who, before a recent spectacular fallout, had been his closest ally in ramming through a radical agenda of upending and remaking the US government. But when the Tesla and SpaceX founder vowed to form a new party if Congress passed Trump's signature 'one big beautiful bill' into law, Trump swung into the retribution mode that is now familiar to his Democratic opponents. 'Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa,' Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, menacing both the billions of dollars in federal subsidies received by Musk's companies, and – it seemed – his US citizenship, which the entrepreneur received in 2002 but which supporters like Steve Bannon have questioned. 'No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE.' Trump twisted the knife further the following morning talking to reporters before boarding a flight to Florida. 'We might have to put Doge on Elon,' he said, referring to the unofficial 'department of government efficiency' that has gutted several government agencies and which Musk spearheaded before stepping back from his ad hoc role in late May. 'Doge is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible.' Musk's many critics may have found sympathy hard to come by given his earlier job-slashing endeavors on Trump's behalf and the $275m he spent last year in helping to elect him. But the wider political implications are worrying, say US democracy campaigners. 'Trump is making clear that if he can do that to the world's richest man, he could certainly do it to you,' said Ian Bassin, co-founder and executive director of Protect Democracy. 'It's important, if we believe in the rule of law, that we believe in it whether it is being weaponized against someone that we have sympathy for or someone that we have lost sympathy for.' Musk was not the only target of Trump's capricious vengeance. He also threatened to investigate the US citizenship of Zohran Mamdani, the Democrats' prospective candidate for mayor of New York who triumphed in a multicandidate primary election, and publicly called on officials to explore the possibility of arresting Alejandro Mayorkas, the former head of homeland security in the Biden administration. Both scenarios were raised during a highly stage-managed visit to 'Alligator Alcatraz', a forbidding new facility built to house undocumented people rounded up as part of Trump's flagship mass-deportation policy. After gleefully conjuring images of imprisoned immigrants being forced to flee from alligators and snakes presumed to reside in the neighbouring marshlands, Trump seized on obliging questions from friendly journalists working for rightwing fringe outlets that have been accredited by the administration for White House news events, often at the expense of established media. 'Why hasn't he been arrested yet?' asked Julio Rosas from Blaze Media, referring to Mayorkas, who was widely vilified – and subsequently impeached – by Republicans who blamed him for a record number of immigrant crossings at the southern US border. 'Was he given a pardon, Mayorkas?' Trump replied. On being told no, he continued: 'I'll take a look at that one because what he did is beyond incompetence … Somebody told Mayorkas to do that and he followed orders, but that doesn't necessarily hold him harmless.' Asked by Benny Johnson, a rightwing social media influencer, for his message to 'communist' Mamdani – a self-proclaimed democratic socialist – over his pledge not to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) roundups of undocumented people if he is elected mayor, Trump said: 'Then we will have to arrest him. We don't need a communist in this country. I'm going to be watching over him very carefully on behalf of the nation.' He also falsely suggested that Mamdani, 33 – who became a naturalized US citizen in 2018 after emigrating from Uganda with his ethnic Indian parents when he was a child – was in the country 'illegally', an assertion stemming from a demand by a Republican representative for a justice department investigation into his citizenship application. The representative, Andy Ogles of Tennessee, alleged that Mamdani, who has vocally campaigned for Palestinian rights, gained it through 'willful misrepresentation or concealment of material support for terrorism'. The threat to Mamdani echoed a threat Trump's border 'czar' Tom Homan made to arrest Gavin Newsom, the California governor, last month amid a row over Trump's deployment of national guard forces in Los Angeles to confront demonstrators protesting against Ice's arrests of immigrants. Omar Noureldin, senior vice-president with Common Cause, a pro-democracy watchdog, said the animus against Mamdani, who is Muslim, was partly fueled by Islamophobia and racism. 'Part of the rhetoric we've heard around Mamdani, whether from the president or other political leaders, goes toward his religion, his national origin, race, ethnicity,' he said. 'Mamdani has called himself a democratic socialist. There are others, including Bernie Sanders, who call themselves that, but folks aren't questioning whether or not Bernie Sanders should be a citizen.' Retribution promised to be a theme of Trump's second presidency even before he returned to the Oval Office in January. On the campaign trail last year, he branded some political opponents – including Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, and Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the House of Representatives – as 'the enemy within'. Since his inauguration in January, he has made petty acts of revenge against both Democrats and Republicans who have crossed him. Biden; Kamala Harris, the former vice-president and last year's defeated Democratic presidential nominee; and Hillary Clinton, Trump's 2016 opponent, have all had their security clearances revoked. Secret Service protection details have been removed from Mike Pompeo and John Bolton, who served in Trump's first administration, despite both being the subject of death threats from Iran because of the 2020 assassination of Qassem Suleimani, a senior Revolutionary Guards commander. Similar fates have befallen Anthony Fauci, the infectious diseases specialist who angered Trump over his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, as well as Biden's adult children, Hunter and Ashley. Trump has also targeted law firms whose lawyers previously acted against him, prompting some to strike deals that will see them perform pro bono services for the administration. For now, widely anticipated acts of retribution against figures like Gen Mark Milley, the former chair of the joint chiefs of staff of the armed forces – whom Trump previously suggested deserved to be executed for 'treason' and who expressed fears of being recalled to active duty and then court-martialed – have not materialised. 'I [and] people in my world expected that Trump would come up with investigations of any number of people, whether they were involved in the Russia investigation way back when, or the election investigation, or the January 6 insurrection, but by and large he hasn't done that,' said one veteran Washington insider, who requested anonymity, citing his proximity to people previously identified as potential Trump targets. 'There are all kinds of lists floating around … with names of people that might be under investigation, but you'll never know you're under investigation until police turn up on your doorstep – and these people are just getting on with their lives.' Yet pro-democracy campaigners say Trump's latest threats should be taken seriously – especially after several recent detentions of several elected Democratic officials at protests near immigration jails or courts. In the most notorious episode, Alex Padilla, a senator from California, was forced to the floor and handcuffed after trying to question Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, at a press conference. 'When the president of the United States, the most powerful person in the world, threatens to arrest you, that's as serious as it gets,' said Bassin, a former White House counsel in Barack Obama's administration. 'Whether the DoJ [Department of Justice] opens an investigation or seeks an indictment, either tomorrow, next year or never is beside the point. The threat itself is the attack on our freedoms, because it's designed to make us all fear that if any one of us opposes or even just criticises the president, we risk being prosecuted.' While some doubt the legal basis of Trump's threats to Musk, Mayorkas and Mamdani, Noureldin cautioned that they should be taken literally. 'Trump is verbose and grandiose, but I think he also backs up his promises with action,' he said. 'When the president of the United States says something, we have to take it as serious and literal. I wouldn't be surprised if at the justice department, there is a group of folks who are trying to figure out a way to [open prosecutions].' But the bigger danger was to the time-honored American notion of freedom, Bassin warned. 'One definition of freedom is that you are able to speak your mind, associate with who you want, lead the life that you choose to lead, and that so long as you conduct yourself in accordance with the law, the government will not retaliate against you or punish you for doing those things,' he said. 'When the president of the United States makes clear that actually that is not the case, that if you say things he doesn't like, you will be singled out, and the full force of the state could be brought down on your head, then you're no longer free. 'And if he's making clear that that's true for people who have the resources of Elon Musk or the political capital of a Mayorkas or a Mamdani, imagine what it means for people who lack those positions or resources.'

‘Blatant misinformation': Social Security Administration email praising Trump's tax bill blasted as a ‘lie'
‘Blatant misinformation': Social Security Administration email praising Trump's tax bill blasted as a ‘lie'

The Guardian

time39 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

‘Blatant misinformation': Social Security Administration email praising Trump's tax bill blasted as a ‘lie'

An email sent by the US Social Security Administration (SSA) that claims Donald Trump's major new spending bill has eliminated taxes on benefits for most recipients is misleading, critics have said. The reconciliation bill – which the president called the 'one big, beautiful bill' before signing it on Friday after Republicans in Congress passed it – includes provisions that will strip people of their health insurance, cut food assistance for the poor, kill off clean energy development and raise the national debt by trillions of dollars. But the bill also 'eliminates federal income taxes on social security benefits for most beneficiaries, providing relief to individuals and couples', the previously apolitical SSA stated in an email circulated on Thursday. Frank Bisignano, the commissioner of the agency, said in a statement that nearly 90% of social security beneficiaries will no longer pay federal income taxes on their benefits. 'This is a historic step forward for America's seniors,' Bisignano said. 'By significantly reducing the tax burden on benefits, this legislation reaffirms President Trump's promise to protect social security and helps ensure that seniors can better enjoy the retirement they've earned.' However, the spending bill does not actually eliminate federal taxes on social security due to the rule constraints of passing a bill this way – through the reconciliation process, to avoid a Democratic filibuster. Instead, the legislation provides a temporary tax deduction of up to $6,000 for people aged 65 and older, and $12,000 for married seniors. These benefits will start to phase out for those with incomes of more than $75,000 and married couples of more than $150,000 a year. Previous SSA officials said that the Trump administration's framing of the bill was misleading. 'People are like: 'Is this real? Is this a scam?' Because it's not what they signed up for,' Kathleen Romig, a former senior adviser at the SSA during the Biden administration, told CNN. 'It doesn't sound like normal government communications, official communications. It sounds like – you know – partisan.' Jeff Nesbit, who served as a top SSA official under Republican and Democratic presidents, posted on X: 'The agency has never issued such a blatant political statement. The fact that Trump and his minion running SSA has done this is unconscionable.' The New Jersey representative Frank Pallone, the top Democrat on the House's energy and commerce committee, wrote on X that 'every word' of the SSA's email on Thursday 'is a lie'. 'This big, ugly bill doesn't change that,' Pallone wrote. 'It's disturbing to see Trump hijack a public institution to push blatant misinformation.'

Trump's admission about Ukraine peace talks after Putin call
Trump's admission about Ukraine peace talks after Putin call

Daily Mail​

time40 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Trump's admission about Ukraine peace talks after Putin call

Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that he spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin , but acknowledged peace with Ukraine is not on the immediate horizon. On the call that lasted about one hour and 15 minutes, Trump disclosed they discussed the recent drone attacks by Ukraine on Russia 's air bases. Kyiv delivered a devastating blow to the Russian air force on Sunday and Putin has vowed revenge including by stockpiling a massive contingent of battle tanks and ammunition. 'It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate peace,' admitted Trump. The president also stated that Putin told him he plans to retaliate against Ukraine after the recent attacks. 'President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields,' Trump disclosed, without details about whether he pushed back on the Russian leader. Trump has been vocal about wanting to end all fighting and bombing between the two nations immediately as the death toll continues to rise in the now years-long conflict. 'We also discussed Iran , and the fact that time is running out on Iran's decision pertaining to nuclear weapons , which must be made quickly! I stated to President Putin that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and, on this, I believe that we were in agreement.' 'President Putin suggested that he will participate in the discussions with Iran and that he could, perhaps, be helpful in getting this brought to a rapid conclusion. It is my opinion that Iran has been slow-walking their decision on this very important matter, and we will need a definitive answer in a very short period of time!'

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