Latest news with #OfficeoftheUSTradeRepresentative
Business Recorder
4 hours ago
- Business
- Business Recorder
Pakistan, US strike ‘win-win' trade deal, says Aurangzeb
Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb on Thursday termed the trade deal struck between Pakistan and the United States a 'win-win' situation for both countries. 'Today marks the culmination of the journey that we started a few months back,' said Aurangzeb in a video message released by the Ministry of Finance. The finance minister shared that the authorities on both sides had 'a very constructive final round of discussions, which then led to finalising the trade deal.' Aurangzeb heads to US to finalise trade talks The breakthrough was reached during a meeting of Pakistan's Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb, with US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and United States Trade Representative Ambassador Jamieson Greer in Washington, D.C. on Thursday. Secretary of Commerce Jawad Paul and Pakistan Ambassador to the United States, Ambassador Rizwan Saeed Sheikh, were also present during the meeting. 'From our perspective, we were always going beyond the trade imperative,' said Aurangzeb, adding that trade and investments 'have to go hand in hand'. The finance minister lauded his economic team, including the role of the private sector, in reaching the trade deal. Aurangzeb shared that investments in various sectors were discussed. 'We will start with energy. Then there is mineral and mining, IT, and the new economy that we are talking about.' 'We are in a good place today in Pakistan, in terms of where we have arrived before August 1. We have come a long way in terms of our overall strategic partnership between Pakistan and the United States,' he said. The remarks come after US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday his administration struck a deal with Pakistan in which Washington would work with Islamabad in developing the South Asian nation's oil reserves. 'We have just concluded a Deal with the Country of Pakistan, whereby Pakistan and the United States will work together on developing their massive Oil Reserves,' Trump wrote on social media. 'We are in the process of choosing the Oil Company that will lead this Partnership. Who knows, maybe they'll be selling Oil to India some day!' Pakistan faced a potential 29% tariff on exports to the United States under tariffs announced by Washington in April on countries around the world. Tariffs were subsequently suspended for 90 days so negotiations could take place. Under Trump, Washington has attempted to renegotiate trade agreements with many countries that he threatened with tariffs over what he calls unfair trade relations. Many economists dispute Trump's characterisation. US total goods trade with Pakistan was an estimated $7.3 billion in 2024, according to the website of the Office of the US Trade Representative, up from around $6.9 billion in 2023. The US goods trade deficit with Pakistan was $3 billion in 2024, a 5.2% increase over 2023.
Mint
4 days ago
- Business
- Mint
India draws the red line on GM foods, dairy ahead of August trade talks with US
New Delhi: As trade negotiations between India and the US entering a critical stretch, New Delhi remains firm that genetically modified (GM) food crops such as maize and soybean, and dairy imports, should not be part of the deal. A senior government official said India's position on GM crops and dairy remains 'non-negotiable". These two sectors have emerged as key points of contention ahead of the next round of face-to-face discussions between India and the US for a bilateral trade agreement. The discussions are scheduled to take place in New Delhi in the second week of August. 'The government has consistently maintained that GM food crops and dairy imports are not aligned with India's domestic priorities—be it on health, environment, or livelihood grounds," the official said, requesting anonymity. 'We are ready to explore other areas of convergence, but we cannot compromise on these issues." The US has been pushing for greater market access for GM maize and soy-based products. Besides, the US's dairy industry has been lobbying for access to India's vast consumer market. However, Indian policymakers have consistently resisted such proposals, citing concerns related to biosafety, political sensitivities, and potential disruption to millions of small-scale dairy farmers. 'Any import of dairy products from subsidized markets like the US could severely hurt India's rural economy and traditional milk cooperatives," this official added. India has instead proposed mutually beneficial options, such as promoting value-added sectors, simplifying regulatory procedures, and offering tariff concessions in non-sensitive areas. New Delhi is also seeking better access for Indian pharmaceuticals, textiles, and services to the US market. A crucial stretch India and the US pushed back their deadline to finalize abilateral trade agreement from the earlier 9 July cutoff to later in the month as US President Donald Trump, while announcing rates for some countries, decided to enforce his reciprocal tariffs from 1 August. The trade deal is crucial for India as negotiators seek the elimination of the reciprocal tariffs and additional duties such as those on steel, aluminium, and auto components. India recently withdrew quality control orders for three key industrial chemicals—acetic acid, methanol, and aniline—to ease compliance burdens on domestic manufacturers. India imports substantial quantities of acetic acid and aniline from the US and China. The decision to withdraw the quality control orders is being viewed as New Delhi's gesture to address US concerns, especially after the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), in its 2025 National Trade Estimate Report released in March, flagged several trade barriers in India, including high tariffs, digital restrictions, and regulatory hurdles. The USTR report specifically raised concerns over India's quality control orders, including one on polyethylene introduced in January 2024. The report said such measures did not align with international standards and disrupted trade in plastics and chemicals. India, however, maintains such policies are essential to prevent the entry of substandard imports. The US remains one of the few countries with which India maintains a strong merchandise trade surplus. In 2024-25, Indian exports to the US rose 11.6% to $86.51 billion, while imports grew 7.4% to $45.33 billion, pushing the surplus to $41.18 billion. India opens up autos, services, liquor to UK; gains access in goods
Al Jazeera
6 days ago
- Business
- Al Jazeera
Fact check: Did US go from ice cream trade surplus to deficit under Biden?
President Donald Trump's administration dished out a cold burn to Trump's ice-cream-loving predecessor, Joe Biden, saying he led the US ice cream industry down an economic rocky road. 'America had a trade surplus in ice cream in 2020 under President Trump's leadership, but that surplus turned into a trade deficit of $40.6 million under President Biden's watch,' the Office of the US Trade Representative wrote July 20 on X. The post included a chart that shows the US ice cream trade deficit with Japan, South Africa, the European Union, Brazil, Canada and Turkiye. The US ice cream trade balance did change dramatically in 2021, the year Biden took office. The trade balance officially flipped negative – which means imports outnumber exports – in 2022 and has remained so since then. But industry experts caution that US ice cream imports account for a minuscule fraction of all the US ice cream consumed in the US, and exports account for a tiny fraction of all US ice cream produced. The trade change was driven mostly by a jump in imports. Exports have remained largely unchanged since 2020. And the cherry on top? Disagreement over which products to classify as 'ice cream' also affects data, experts say. For example, the data referenced by the office of the US Trade Representative also includes 'edible ice', which some experts (and dairy defenders) say doesn't qualify as ice cream. Removing edible ice shows that 'the US is a net exporter by a significant margin of ($193 million) or +85% larger by value,' International Dairy Foods Association Executive Vice President Matt Herrick told PolitiFact via email. Ice cream imports increase causes US trade deficit From 1995 to 2020, the US had an ice cream trade surplus, ranging from about $20m to about $160m, according to the Observatory of Economic Complexity, an online economic data platform. Longtime customers include Mexico, followed by Saudi Arabia and Canada. In 2021, that surplus nearly vanished, and in 2022 and 2023, the US notched up an ice cream trade deficit of $92m and $33m, respectively. At first glance, importing frozen foods doesn't seem practical. 'Shipping refrigerated and frozen products overseas is expensive,' dairy economist Betty Berningat of HighGround Dairy said. 'Mexico is the top destination for US dairy exports.' But many US and European companies have tapped into global markets. 'Consumers may also want a specific treat that is styled after or known to be from another country,' Herrick said. Italy, the birthplace of gelato, is now the United States' largest single source of imported ice cream. Italian ice cream imports more than quintupled from about $12m to almost $65m between 2020 and 2021 alone, before decreasing somewhat in 2023, the last year for which data is available. Some of this stems from increased consumer demand for specialty pints. A report by Mordor Intelligence, a global market research firm, said 'product innovation and premiumisation' have become key in the US ice cream industry. 'This trend is particularly evident in the growth of premium pint offerings and individually wrapped novelties that cater to both indulgence and portion control preferences,' the report said. The US produces far more ice cream than it imports or exports To get to the pint: The vast majority of ice cream consumed in the United States is made there, not overseas. The Trump administration is cherry-picking stats from a fraction of a sliver of the US ice cream industry. According to US Agriculture Department data, US ice cream makers churned out 1.31 billion gallons of ice cream in 2024. This includes regular ice cream, low-fat and nonfat ice cream, sherbet and frozen yoghurt. By comparison, the US imported 2.35 million gallons of traditional ice cream in 2024 – that's 0.18 percent of the amount produced domestically, Herrick said. The US exported 16.4 million gallons of that domestic production, which is also a tiny fraction of 1.31 billion gallons of ice cream – a little more than 1 percent. Factoring in ice cream mixes, excluding 'edible ice' products Another caveat about the international trade data: It does not include 'mixes', which skews the totals, said Herrick of the International Dairy Foods Association. Mixes are used to make ice cream shakes and soft-serve products, and they account for a significant portion of US ice cream exports. 'Inclusion of such data points would change the picture quite significantly,' said Herrick. 'While it is true that traditional ice cream and edible ice exports have seen decreased exports, the same cannot be said for exports of mixes.' US milk-based drink exports increased 621 percent over the past five years, he said. In 2024, the US exported nearly $35m in mixes to the European Union. Americans and dairy-based ice cream: A centuries-old love affair melting away? The White House has churned out plenty of ice cream devotees. George Washington stocked the capital with ice cream-making equipment. Thomas Jefferson is credited as being the first American to record an ice cream recipe. Ronald Reagan declared July National Ice Cream Month in 1984. Barack Obama even slung scoops back in the day. Biden, who was often sighted with a cone in hand, proclaimed while visiting Jeni's Splendid Ice Cream headquarters in 2016: 'My name is Joe Biden, and I love ice cream.' But consumption of regular dairy ice cream – a category that does not include frozen yoghurt, sherbet or nonfat and low-fat ice creams – has been trending down for years. In 1975, Americans ate an average of 18.2 pounds each of ice cream per year. That figure fell to 11.7 pounds by 2023. Our ruling The office of the US Trade Representative purported a summertime scoop: 'America had a trade surplus in ice cream in 2020 under President Trump's leadership, but that surplus turned into a trade deficit of $40.6 million under President Biden's watch.' It's accurate that the US ice cream trade balance had a surplus for a quarter of a century before turning negative while Biden was president. But the US Trade Representative's statement makes the US ice cream deficit appear out of cone-trol. There are three scoops of context on this trade sundae: The change was driven mostly by a jump in imports. Exports have remained largely unchanged since 2020. US ice cream imports and exports are a negligible amount compared to domestic production. There's also disagreement over which products should or shouldn't be included in the data set, which can skew trend interpretations. Excluding edible ice products and factoring in ice cream mixes leaves the US with a surplus. The statement is accurate but needs a sprinkling of clarification and additional details, so we rate it Mostly True. Louis Jacobson contributed to this report.
Sydney Morning Herald
24-07-2025
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
Lost in translation: Trump doesn't seem to understand the ‘massive' deal he just made
The other big 'win' for the US was, Trump claims, the opening of its agricultural markets to US exports, particularly the market for rice, which has historically been extremely politically sensitive in Japan. According to the Office of the US Trade Representative, American farmers will have the same advantage as countries within the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership in selling into the Japanese market. During the Obama administration, America was going to be a party to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free trade agreement whose members include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. It was Trump, within days of taking office in his first in January 2017, who withdrew the US from the TPP. America's farmers could have had the same trade terms with Japan as those countries eight years ago, if not for Trump. As for rice, Japan already imports up to 770,000 tonnes a year (the amount is capped to protect its own rice farmers), with the US supplying about 45 per cent of that volume. Yes, the US may be able to sell more and perhaps displace other suppliers, but Japan has reserved the right to decide the additional volume and quality of any extra imports from the US. Loading The bottom line for the trade elements of the deal is that it does lift the tariff rate on Japan's exports to the US – US consumers will pay more for Japanese products – but Japan has negotiated a deal that does only minor damage to its exports and economy in the process while presenting Trump with the ability to trumpet that he has opened up access to its domestic markets even though nothing material is likely to change. Indeed, unless Trump is forced to lower the rates on other countries auto and auto parts exports to the US, along with his sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminium and copper, the Japanese negotiators have given their key exporters a competitive edge. Trump says there's never been anything like the deal with Japan. He may be right, even if it appears he doesn't understand how it might play out in practice. There is a very large non-trade element to the deal. Japan has promised, it seems, to invest up to $US550 billion in the US, at Trump's direction and with the US allocated 90 per cent of any profits the investments might generate. The White House described the funding as the 'centrepiece' of the agreement with Japan, with the US Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, saying Japan had been awarded the 15 per cent tariff rate 'because they were willing to provide this innovative financing mechanism.' There are few details available on what is being loosely described as a Japanese sovereign wealth fund dedicated to investing in strategic sectors like semi-conductors, pharmaceuticals, steel, shipbuilding, critical minerals and energy in the US. The Japanese say the funds will come from their state banks and government agencies and will be in the form of equity, debt and guarantees. That suggests the $US550 billion, if it ever materialises, will be largely loans and loan guarantees for Japanese and US companies investing in projects Trump deems important. The detail will matter. Having effectively been extorted into agreeing to provide the funding, they are hardly likely to hand over $US550 billion without conditions and safeguards to someone who has declared bankruptcy four times. Loading They also have China's precedent to guide them. To end Trump's 2018-19 trade war, China agreed to buy a massively increased volume of US products. It eventually bought a little more than half what it had agreed to. Japan can slow-walk the handing over of the funds, knowing that, if it stretches the process out, a new administration in 2029 might have different views on trade. The investment agreement, apparently the brainchild of the Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick as it became clear that Japan wasn't going to accede to Trump's most aggressive demands for market access, is a peculiar one if Trump's aim is, as he has always claimed, to reduce America's trade deficit. If Japan were to actually deliver $US550 billion of new capital inflows to the US, it would increase the trade deficit, not decrease it. It would also probably help push up the value of the US dollar, which has been tumbling, making US exports less competitive in international markets. Did anyone explain that to Trump? Trump says there's never been anything like the deal with Japan. He may be right, even if it appears he doesn't understand how it might play out in practice. The deal with Japan provides a benchmark for the European Union, which appears very close to either agreeing its own deal or walking away and retaliating with punitive tariffs on US imports. It could probably live with a 15 per cent rate and no cap on its auto exports, provided there is nothing in the US demands that relates to its valued-added tax system or its regulation of social media platforms and big technology companies. Once Trump's August 1 deadline for deals is reached, the larger picture of Trump's trade wars will be clear, if still quite messy with its range of different tariffs, different rates and side-deals like the Japanese funding. Loading Crudely, however, the new 'baseline' tariff rate for America's major trading partners now appears to be 15 per cent. The average effective US tariff rate will have risen from about 2.4 per cent before he took office again to something around 20 per cent. Trade flows will be distorted, global supply chains severely disrupted, US companies and consumers will be paying a big new tax on their spending and the US inflation rate, and interest rates, will be higher than they would otherwise have been. Will that make America great again?
The Age
24-07-2025
- Business
- The Age
Lost in translation: Trump doesn't seem to understand the ‘massive' deal he just made
The other big 'win' for the US was, Trump claims, the opening of its agricultural markets to US exports, particularly the market for rice, which has historically been extremely politically sensitive in Japan. According to the Office of the US Trade Representative, American farmers will have the same advantage as countries within the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership in selling into the Japanese market. During the Obama administration, America was going to be a party to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free trade agreement whose members include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. It was Trump, within days of taking office in his first in January 2017, who withdrew the US from the TPP. America's farmers could have had the same trade terms with Japan as those countries eight years ago, if not for Trump. As for rice, Japan already imports up to 770,000 tonnes a year (the amount is capped to protect its own rice farmers), with the US supplying about 45 per cent of that volume. Yes, the US may be able to sell more and perhaps displace other suppliers, but Japan has reserved the right to decide the additional volume and quality of any extra imports from the US. Loading The bottom line for the trade elements of the deal is that it does lift the tariff rate on Japan's exports to the US – US consumers will pay more for Japanese products – but Japan has negotiated a deal that does only minor damage to its exports and economy in the process while presenting Trump with the ability to trumpet that he has opened up access to its domestic markets even though nothing material is likely to change. Indeed, unless Trump is forced to lower the rates on other countries auto and auto parts exports to the US, along with his sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminium and copper, the Japanese negotiators have given their key exporters a competitive edge. Trump says there's never been anything like the deal with Japan. He may be right, even if it appears he doesn't understand how it might play out in practice. There is a very large non-trade element to the deal. Japan has promised, it seems, to invest up to $US550 billion in the US, at Trump's direction and with the US allocated 90 per cent of any profits the investments might generate. The White House described the funding as the 'centrepiece' of the agreement with Japan, with the US Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, saying Japan had been awarded the 15 per cent tariff rate 'because they were willing to provide this innovative financing mechanism.' There are few details available on what is being loosely described as a Japanese sovereign wealth fund dedicated to investing in strategic sectors like semi-conductors, pharmaceuticals, steel, shipbuilding, critical minerals and energy in the US. The Japanese say the funds will come from their state banks and government agencies and will be in the form of equity, debt and guarantees. That suggests the $US550 billion, if it ever materialises, will be largely loans and loan guarantees for Japanese and US companies investing in projects Trump deems important. The detail will matter. Having effectively been extorted into agreeing to provide the funding, they are hardly likely to hand over $US550 billion without conditions and safeguards to someone who has declared bankruptcy four times. Loading They also have China's precedent to guide them. To end Trump's 2018-19 trade war, China agreed to buy a massively increased volume of US products. It eventually bought a little more than half what it had agreed to. Japan can slow-walk the handing over of the funds, knowing that, if it stretches the process out, a new administration in 2029 might have different views on trade. The investment agreement, apparently the brainchild of the Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick as it became clear that Japan wasn't going to accede to Trump's most aggressive demands for market access, is a peculiar one if Trump's aim is, as he has always claimed, to reduce America's trade deficit. If Japan were to actually deliver $US550 billion of new capital inflows to the US, it would increase the trade deficit, not decrease it. It would also probably help push up the value of the US dollar, which has been tumbling, making US exports less competitive in international markets. Did anyone explain that to Trump? Trump says there's never been anything like the deal with Japan. He may be right, even if it appears he doesn't understand how it might play out in practice. The deal with Japan provides a benchmark for the European Union, which appears very close to either agreeing its own deal or walking away and retaliating with punitive tariffs on US imports. It could probably live with a 15 per cent rate and no cap on its auto exports, provided there is nothing in the US demands that relates to its valued-added tax system or its regulation of social media platforms and big technology companies. Once Trump's August 1 deadline for deals is reached, the larger picture of Trump's trade wars will be clear, if still quite messy with its range of different tariffs, different rates and side-deals like the Japanese funding. Loading Crudely, however, the new 'baseline' tariff rate for America's major trading partners now appears to be 15 per cent. The average effective US tariff rate will have risen from about 2.4 per cent before he took office again to something around 20 per cent. Trade flows will be distorted, global supply chains severely disrupted, US companies and consumers will be paying a big new tax on their spending and the US inflation rate, and interest rates, will be higher than they would otherwise have been. Will that make America great again?
