Trump to put 25% tariffs on Japan and South Korea, new import taxes on 12 other nations.
Donald Trump provided notice by posting letters on Truth Social that were addressed to the leaders of the various countries. The letters warned them to not retaliate by increasing their own import taxes, or else the Trump administration would further increase tariffs.
'If for any reason you decide to raise your Tariffs, then, whatever the number you choose to raise them by, will be added onto the 25% that we charge,' Trump wrote in the letters to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and South Korean President Lee Jae-myung.
The letters were not the final word from Trump on tariffs, so much as another episode in a global economic drama in which he has placed himself at the center. His moves have raised fears that economic growth would slow to a trickle, if not make the U.S. and other nations more vulnerable to a recession. But Trump is confident that tariffs are necessary to bring back domestic manufacturing and fund the tax cuts he signed into law last Friday.
He mixed his sense of aggression with a willingness to still negotiate, signaling the likelihood that the drama and uncertainty would continue and that few things are ever final with Trump.
'It's all done," Trump told reporters on Monday. 'I told you we'll make some deals, but for the most part we're going to send a letter.'
Imports from Myanmar and Laos would be taxed at 40%, Cambodia and Thailand at 36%, Serbia and Bangladesh at 35%, Indonesia at 32%, South Africa and Bosnia and Herzegovina at 30% and Kazakhstan, Malaysia and Tunisia at 25%.
Trump placed the word 'only' before revealing the rate in his letters to the foreign leaders, implying that he was being generous with his tariffs. But the letters generally followed a standard format, so much so that the one to Bosnia and Herzegovina initially addressed its woman leader, Željka Cvijanović, as 'Mr. President.' Trump later posted a corrected letter.
Trade talks have yet to deliver several deals
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that Trump was by setting the rates himself creating 'tailor-made trade plans for each and every country on this planet and that's what this administration continues to be focused on.'
Following a now well-worn pattern, Trump plans to continue sharing the letters sent to his counterparts on social media and then mail them the documents, a stark departure from the more formal practices of all his predecessors when negotiating trade agreements.
The letters are not agreed-to settlements but Trump's own choice on rates, a sign that the closed-door talks with foreign delegations failed to produce satisfactory results for either side.
Wendy Cutler, vice president of the Asia Society Policy Institute who formerly worked in the office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said the tariff hikes on Japan and South Korea were 'unfortunate.'
'Both have been close partners on economic security matters and have a lot to offer the United States on priority matters like shipbuilding, semiconductors, critical minerals and energy cooperation,' Cutler said.
Trump still has outstanding differences on trade with the European Union and India, among other trading partners. Tougher talks with China are on a longer time horizon in which imports from that nation are being taxed at 55%.
The office of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said in a statement that the tariff rates announced by Trump mischaracterized the trade relationship with the U.S., but it would 'continue with its diplomatic efforts towards a more balanced and mutually beneficial trade relationship with the United States" after having proposed a trade framework on May 20.
Higher tariffs prompt market worries, more uncertainty ahead
The S&P 500 stock index was down 0.8% in Monday trading, while the interest charged on 10-year U.S. Treasury notes had increased to nearly 4.39%, a figure that could translate into elevated rates for mortgages and auto loans.
Trump has declared an economic emergency to unilaterally impose the taxes, suggesting they are remedies for past trade deficits even though many U.S. consumers have come to value autos, electronics and other goods from Japan and South Korea. The constitution grants Congress the power to levy tariffs under normal circumstances, though tariffs can also result from executive branch investigations regarding national security risks.
Trump's ability to impose tariffs through an economic emergency is under legal challenge, with the administration appealing a May ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade that said the president exceeded his authority.
It's unclear what he gains strategically against China — another stated reason for the tariffs — by challenging two crucial partners in Asia, Japan and South Korea, that could counter China's economic heft.
'These tariffs may be modified, upward or downward, depending on our relationship with your Country,' Trump wrote in both letters.
Because the new tariff rates go into effect in roughly three weeks, Trump is setting up a period of possibly tempestuous talks among the U.S. and its trade partners to reach new frameworks.
'I don't see a huge escalation or a walk back — it's just more of the same," said Scott Lincicome, a vice president at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank
Trump initially roiled the financial markets by announcing tariff rates on dozens of countries, including 24% on Japan and 25% on South Korea. In order to calm the markets, Trump unveiled a 90-day negotiating period during which goods from most countries were taxed at a baseline 10%. So far, the rates in the letters sent by Trump either match his April 2 tariffs or are generally close to them.
The 90-day negotiating period technically ends on Wednesday, even as multiple administration officials suggested the three-week period before implementation is akin to overtime for additional talks that could change the rates. Trump plans to sign an executive order on Monday to delay the official tariff increases until Aug. 1, Leavitt said.
Congressionally approved Trade agreements historically have sometimes taken years to negotiate because of the complexity.
Administration officials have said Trump is relying on tariff revenues to help offset the tax cuts he signed into law on July 4, a move that could shift a greater share of the federal tax burden onto the middle class and poor as importers would likely pass along much of the cost of the tariffs. Trump has warned major retailers such as Walmart to simply 'eat' the higher costs, instead of increasing prices in ways that could intensify inflation.
Josh Lipsky, chair of international economics at The Atlantic Council, said that a three-week delay in imposing the tariffs was unlikely sufficient for meaningful talks to take place.
'I take it as a signal that he is serious about most of these tariffs and it's not all a negotiating posture," Lipsky said.
Trade gaps persist, more tariff hikes are possible
Trump's team promised 90 deals in 90 days, but his negotiations so far have produced only two trade frameworks.
His outline of a deal with Vietnam was clearly designed to box out China from routing its America-bound goods through that country, by doubling the 20% tariff charged on Vietnamese imports on anything traded transnationally.
The quotas in the signed United Kingdom framework would spare that nation from the higher tariff rates being charged on steel, aluminum and autos, though British goods would generally face a 10% tariff.
The United States ran a $69.4 billion trade imbalance in goods with Japan in 2024 and a $66 billion imbalance with South Korea, according to the Census Bureau. The trade deficits are the differences between what the U.S. exports to a country relative to what it imports.
According to Trump's letters, autos would be tariffed separately at the standard 25% worldwide, while steel and aluminum imports would be taxed on 50%.
This is not the first time that Trump has tangled with Japan and South Korea on trade — and the new tariffs suggest his past deals made during his first term failed to deliver on his administration's own hype.
In 2018, during Trump's first term, his administration celebrated a revamped trade agreement with South Korea as a major win. And in 2019, Trump signed a limited agreement with Japan on agricultural products and digital trade that at the time he called a 'huge victory for America's farmers, ranchers and growers.'
Trump has also said on social media that countries aligned with the policy goals of BRICS, an organization composed of Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates, would face additional tariffs of 10%.
___
Associated Press writer Gerald Imray in Cape Town, South Africa contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says August 1 tariff deadline 'not 100% firm', open to proposals
STORY: :: Trump says an August 1 tariff deadline is 'not 100% firm' :: July 7, 2025 :: Washington, D.C. Trump: 'I would say firm, but not 100% firm. If they call up and they say would like to do something a different way, we're going to be open to that. But essentially that's the way it is right now.' 'We are always subject to negotiate something that's fair. But we've talked to most of the countries and pretty much they've had their way for many, many decades. As you know. And it was time that we just wanted fairness." "We've made a deal with United Kingdom, we've made a deal with China. We're close to making a deal with India. Others we've met with, and we don't think we're going to be able to make a deal. So we just send them a letter. If you want to play ball, this is what you have to pay. So, as far as I'm concerned, we're done with sending out letters to various countries telling them how much tariffs they have to pay. Some will maybe adjust a little bit, depending if they have a you know, cause. But we're not going to be unfair about it. And actually, it's a small fraction compared to what we should be getting. We should be, we could be asking for much more, but for the sake of relationships that we've had with a lot of really good countries, we're doing the way I do it.' Asked if the deadline was firm, Trump said: "I would say firm, but not 100% firm. If they call up and they say we'd like to do something a different way, we're going to be open to that." Trump began telling trade partners - from powerhouse suppliers like Japan and South Korea to minor players - that sharply higher U.S. tariffs would start August 1, marking a new phase in the trade war he launched earlier this year.


CNN
38 minutes ago
- CNN
Analysis: Natural-disaster blame games obscure the steps needed to keep Americans safe
America's endless natural-disaster blame game is thwarting answers to life-and-death questions over worsening extreme weather crises. Every time a hurricane, flood or wildfire strikes, political enemies heap knee-jerk blame on their foes – usually long before all the victims are accounted for. This pattern was back on display after a horrific tragedy in Texas, where floods killed more than 100 people after raging through summer camps and July Fourth celebrations. Some liberals whipped up viral social media posts claiming that Elon Musk's DOGE budget cuts were directly to blame for extreme weather alerts not reaching those in the torrent's way. President Donald Trump on Sunday seemed about to pin the disaster on President Joe Biden before backing away. But his Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who is dismembering the Federal Emergency Management Agency, went on Fox to criticize the last administration. And her department, now an arm of the MAGA movement, accused the media of lying about what really happened. The ugly partisan wars that broke out as parents face unfathomable loss are typical of a political culture that has severed itself from basic humanity. And they underscore that social media remains a Wild West of misinformation and spite that worsens malign political instincts. Natural disasters are always perilous for those in power. But recriminations intensified after Hurricane Katrina. The 2005 monster storm hit New Orleans and the Gulf Coast and, along with Iraq, destroyed President George W. Bush's second term. Beltway pundits now react to every act of God by predicting the current president's 'Katrina' is nigh. Questioning what happened in the wake of a natural disaster and whether political failings at the local, state or national levels contributed to deaths and devastation is perfectly appropriate. Victims deserve accountability untainted by politics. It's important to understand what went wrong in order to save lives in the future. But it's increasingly rare in an age of partisan media on the right and left for activists to wait for the facts, or to accept outcomes that don't fit their political goals. It's too early to say for sure whether Trump's budget cuts to agencies like FEMA and the National Weather Service made the Texas disaster worse. Investigations will probe communications of the federal government and Texas authorities and the actions of local officials. There will be a focus on whether weather warnings were sufficiently specific or clear and whether infrastructure in Kerr County is up to the job of extreme weather situations. Kerrville Mayor Joe Herring Jr., for instance, told CNN's Pamela Brown that he didn't receive an emergency alert in the predawn hours of Friday when floodwaters arrived. There will also surely be questions over why children's summer camps were sited in such a vulnerable area. Sometimes political choices do end up leading to disastrous outcomes. But not always. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt insisted Monday that NWS offices in Texas made 'timely and accurate forecasts and warnings.' She said that the relevant NWS offices in New Braunfels had extra staff on duty for the storms despite claims to the contrary. Leavitt slammed what she said were 'depraved and despicable' efforts by some on the left to exploit the disaster politically 'especially when so many Americans are mourning the loss of their children.' It's hard to disagree. But there's a difference between social media users jumping to premature or outright false conclusions and politicians questioning whether Trump's efforts to stifle government research and to gut the federal government will make it harder to forecast disasters like the one in Texas in the future. Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer demanded an immediate investigation by the Commerce Department's inspector general into whether administration staff cuts made the tragic loss of life worth. He focused on vacancies at the San Angelo and San Antonio NWS offices. Leavitt accused Schumer of pushing 'falsehoods.' There's a whiff of hypocrisy in the White House's outrage, considering that Trump has politicized natural disasters for his own gain more than any modern president. Trump slammed Democrats including Biden and local leaders over fatal wildfires that charred swaths of residential areas in Los Angeles just before he took office in January; he made false claims about water supplies and FEMA aid. Trump also misrepresented federal relief efforts after storms hit North Carolina and Georgia last year. And he claimed that a collision between a civilian jetliner and military helicopter close to Washington's National Airport that killed everyone on both aircraft was due to diversity and inclusion policies at the Federal Aviation Administration. His track record raises the question of whether the White House would have been as keen to rush aid and to praise local officials if the holiday weekend's flooding had occurred in a Democratic-run state rather than Republican Texas under Gov. Greg Abbott, an outspoken Trump supporter. Prev Next There are lessons and warnings that the Trump White House might heed in the aftermath of the Texas floods – even if its statements about appropriate pre-disaster staffing and funding are ultimately validated. The disaster is a reminder that jobs like those of forecasters at agencies like NWS and experts contracted by FEMA may seem superfluous 364 days a year – but on one crucial day, they can save scores of people. Putting money into basic infrastructure like early flood warning signs might annoy taxpayers and be targeted by conservatives as examples of bloated public spending, but it can be critical. Benjamin Franklin is often quoted as having said that those who fail to prepare are preparing to fail. If the Trump administration continues to slash expertise, institutional experience and what it sees as redundancies in vital government agencies, it will lay the groundwork for botched disaster responses in future. CNN reported earlier this year that the administration had failed to staff a White House Office for Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy – an odd decision considering Trump's mismanagement of the Covid-19 emergency in his first term. The White House on Monday refused to say whether the president would push ahead with a plan to eliminate FEMA entirely by the end of the year. 'The president wants to ensure American citizens always have what they need during times of need,' Leavitt said. The White House is pushing to put far more of a burden on states to respond to disasters rather than relying on the federal government to step in. Relief and rebuilding after storms, wildfires and other natural disasters are likely to still require billion-dollar emergency appropriations from Congress. But wiping out FEMA's standing reserve of relief funds and its capacity, expertise and personnel could weaken rescue workers' capacity to prepare and position before forecastable natural disasters. And it could drain the store of accumulated knowledge that states can't match. 'We need to improve FEMA, not destroy it,' retired Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré, who led National Guard troops into New Orleans after Katrina, told CNN. 'We need FEMA and we need them to do what they're doing and do it better, but not destroy FEMA. That's a bad idea.' More broadly, the Texas flooding catastrophe is the latest in a string of disasters – more intense storms, more ravenous wildfires, and sudden unusual rainfall – that promise to become more frequent as the global climate warms. Yet it's impossible to have a mature national debate about what America needs to do to protect its citizens from such extreme weather events. Trump denies the science that says climate change exists, bemoans the Democrats' 'Green New Scam' and has eviscerated the government's capacity to act against man-made climate change. He has even made it hard to conduct research on climate change with his attacks on science in his budgets, his new 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' law and through Musk at DOGE before his spectacular break-up with the Tesla electric vehicle pioneer. It's an indictment of a fractious public square that something as basic as weather – a naturally occurring force that affects all humanity – has become a bitter political issue on which a fractured nation can't find common ground. 'This was a once-in-a-century flash flood, a tragic natural disaster,' Leavitt said of the Texas floods on Monday. That may be true. But it's no basis for real policy that keeps Americans safe in years to come.
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Samsung Elec to buy healthcare services company Xealth
SEOUL (Reuters) -Samsung Electronics said on Tuesday it had signed an agreement to acquire Xealth, a U.S.-based healthcare platform, as part of its efforts to expand its mobile healthcare services business. The South Korean company did not disclose the value of the transaction. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data