On August 1, the United States reached a temporary pause on its “countervailing tariffs.” However, just hours before the deadline, the White House announced a new set of “countervailing tariffs” rates.
According to an executive order signed by President Trump on July 31, US trading partners will face either an increase or decrease in their “countervailing tariffs” rates.
The new tariffs are set to take effect on August 7.
This also means that trade partners who have not yet reached an agreement with the Trump administration still have seven days to continue negotiations with him.
Trump is implementing a trade system he has conceived, which is more protectionist and isolationist than previous ones.
Eswar Prasad, a professor of trade policy at Cornell University, described this as “a dark day in the history of global trade integration, which was once seen as a hopeful way to bring nations together under the vision of shared prosperity.”
Under the aforementioned executive order, the US authorities will maintain the “comprehensive” tariffs imposed on imported goods into the US at 10%, the same rate as implemented on April 2.
However, the aforementioned 10% tariff applies only to countries with a trade surplus in the US.
A senior government official stated that this policy applies to most countries.
For countries with a trade deficit with the US, a 15% tariff rate will become the new lower limit, with approximately 40 countries applying this rate.
For many of these countries, the new tariffs will be lower than the “countervailing tariffs” rates announced on April 2, but a few will be higher.
Some countries will have higher tariffs due to having already reached some form of trade framework agreement with the US, or because Trump issued a notice letter explicitly demanding higher tariffs.
The senior official mentioned that these countries are among the largest contributors to the US trade deficit.
至截稿时，白宫已经确定了
27个国家和地区的商品将被征收超过15%的关税
，包括：加拿大35%，阿尔及利亚30%，孟加拉国20%，波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那30%，文莱25%，柬埔寨19%，印度25%，印度尼西亚19%，伊拉克35%，哈萨克斯坦25%，老挝40%，利比亚30%，马来西亚19%，摩尔多瓦25%，缅甸40%，尼加拉瓜18%，巴基斯坦19%，菲律宾19%，塞尔维亚35%，南非30%，斯里兰卡20%，瑞士39%，叙利亚41%，泰国19%，突尼斯25%，越南20%，中国台湾20%。
行政令还对所谓的转运设立了40%的额外罚款。
转运是指把货物从高关税国家运往低关税国家，然后再转运到美国。
美国已对海关和边境保护局人员认定为转运的货物处以罚款。一位美国政府高级官员表示，这40%的罚款将在此基础上加收。
未来几周，美国政府预计将制定原产地规则，明确哪些类型的商品和内容也需缴纳40%的关税。
此次宣布的新关税税率，
柬埔寨、越南、印度尼西亚、马来西亚和泰国的均已大幅下调。
柬埔寨首相洪玛奈表示，柬埔寨对美国出口商品的关税从原来的49%降至19%，这对柬埔寨人民和经济来说是个好消息。柬埔寨副首相兼首席贸易谈判代表孙占托称，降低关税有助于避免该国至关重要的服装业崩溃。
瑞士的最高关税税率达到39%，较4月份美政府提出的31%大幅提高。
瑞士政府对此表示“非常遗憾”。
As one of the largest trading partners in the United States, Canada’s tariff on goods has been raised from 25% to 35%.
According to a White House statement, the new tariff rates will take effect on August 1st. These tariffs will apply to all products not included in the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Goods that are re-exported to other countries to evade these new tariffs will be subject to a 40% re-export tax.
On the evening of July 31st, the White House stated that Trump’s increase in tariffs on Canada was due to Canada’s failure to take action against the “public health crisis” caused by the “fentanyl and illegal drugs crossing the northern border into the United States.”
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed his disappointment over this decision. Canada has taken measures to strengthen border control, accounting for only 1% of the United States’ fentanyl imports.
Trudy also posted on social media platform X, stating that the U.S.’s tariff policy would severely impact timber, steel, aluminum, and automobile exports, vowing to take action to protect Canadian job opportunities, invest in industrial competitiveness, and diversify export markets.
He mentioned that Canada would continue negotiations with the United States but also committed to reducing domestic trade barriers to create new investment opportunities for Canadians and become “our best customers.”
However, Trump posted on social media early on July 31st that he might not reach a tariff agreement with Canada as a punishment for recognizing the state of Palestine.
“Canada just announced its support for the establishment of Palestine,” Trump wrote on his “Truth Social” platform, “which will make it difficult for us to reach a trade agreement with them.”
Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo said that if Trudeau “starts showing charm and stops retaliating,” Trump might reconsider tariffs.
This change in U.S. tariffs recalls Trump’s actions during his “Liberty Day” in April, when he similarly raised import taxes comprehensively.
This move plunged the financial markets into chaos and raised concerns about a global economic recession.
However, he ultimately postponed it hours after the “equal tariffs” took effect in April, later stating that August 1 would be the new deadline for the trade agreement.
According to the latest executive order, most tariffs will take effect on August 7, when the average U.S. tariff rate will rise from the current 13.3% to 15.2%.
A senior U.S. government official stated that the need for a new effective date was to allow the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to update the Harmonized Tariff Schedule for implementing higher tariffs.
Whether Trump will extend the tariff pause period’s expiration date again remains uncertain.
During an interview with NBC News by phone, Trump discussed the implementation of a new round of large-scale import tariffs, stating that everything is progressing “very smoothly, very steadily.”
He also mentioned that for countries that have not yet reached an agreement, it is “too late,” and they cannot avoid the new tariff rates set to take effect on August 7. However, he added that his door is always open, welcoming attractive proposals.
From April 2nd to July 9th, and then to August 1st, many countries have been dealing with the delays and repetitions of this trade turmoil.
Trump once claimed to have reached “over 200 agreements,” and White House Trade and Manufacturing Senior Advisor Navarro also said a “90-day 90-agreement” could be achieved. However, after 120 days, the United States has only reached seven trade agreements, including framework agreements with South Korea, the European Union, Japan, the United Kingdom, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines.
The United States led the way in reaching a framework agreement with the United States, setting a benchmark tariff of 10% on exported goods and several quota exemptions. However, negotiations are still ongoing for terms such as steel and aluminum tariff reductions, and the repeal of digital services tax.
On July 2, an agreement was reached to reduce the tariff on U.S. exports from 46% to 20%, but details of the customs duties for goods transported through third countries remain unclear.
On July 15, an agreement was reached to lower the tariff on U.S. exports from 32% to 19%, with a commitment to eliminate tariff barriers on over 99% of U.S. imported goods into India.
The agreement reached on July 22 shows that the tariff on U.S. exports has only been reduced from 20% to 19%, but zero tariffs will be applied to U.S. imports.
As a major Asian economy, an agreement was reached on July 23 to reduce the tariff on U.S. exports from 25% to 15%, marking the first time the automobile industry would enjoy a lower tax rate. At the same time, Japan will invest $550 billion in the U.S. and open markets for automobiles and rice.
A similar agreement was reached with Japan, reducing both comprehensive export and automobile tariffs to 15%. Meanwhile, the U.S. committed not to impose new restrictions on Korean semiconductors and pharmaceutical products. South Korea agreed to invest approximately $350 billion (of which $150 billion will be used for shipbuilding cooperation) and purchase about $100 billion worth of energy.
After lengthy negotiations, it was determined that goods destined for the U.S. would be subject to a 15% base tariff, with automobile tariffs reduced to 15%. However, there is a need for an additional investment of $600 billion in the U.S. and a commitment to import total energy from the U.S. worth $750 billion over the next three years. This agreement has been criticized by some member states.
It remains unclear whether these agreements will ultimately take effect, but it seems these countries have avoided higher tariffs than those stipulated in their agreements.
In negotiations with China, on July 28 and 29 local time, China and the U.S. held economic and trade talks in Stockholm, Sweden. According to Xinhua News Agency, both sides agreed to continue pushing forward the suspension of the U.S. “countervailing duty” at 24% and China’s countermeasures, extending them for another 90 days as scheduled, sending a significant signal of hope for global economies to move towards each other again.
此次是继日内瓦和伦敦之后，双方在短短三个月内举行的第三场经贸会谈，延续了以对话聚共识的不懈努力。对外经济贸易大学区域国别研究院研究员、巴黎索邦大学博士生导师赵永升向《国际金融报》表示，如果说日内瓦会谈是破冰式的会谈，主要任务是落实领导人共识，确立谈判框架，但未涉及具体细节，伦敦框架则是在日内瓦会谈基础上的进一步细化。而本次在瑞典举办的中美经贸会谈，从结果来看，总体呈现“深入、建设性和坦诚”的特点。此前在伦敦会谈中达成的暂停24%“对等关税”措施，此次得到续展。赵永升表示，中方相应的反制措施也同步延续，这一成果属于“暂缓性”进展，为后续谈判争取了时间窗口。
展望未来，赵永升认为，90天关税暂停窗口期是关键，在此期间可能会举行技术级磋商，细化产业合作方案。
同样获得90天谈判窗口期的还有墨西哥。当地时间7月31日，特朗普通过社交媒体表示，与墨西哥总统克劳迪娅·辛鲍姆进行了“非常成功”的电话会谈，并同意在未来90天延长近一段时间实施的协议，美国会继续对来自墨西哥的钢、铝、铜、汽车和其他产品征收从25%至50%不等的进口关税。
当地时间7月31日，针对特朗普签署的行政令，白宫在之后的声明中表示：“在多年无法持续的贸易逆差威胁美国经济与国家安全之后，特朗普总统正将关税作为一项必要且强而有力的工具，以落实美国优先政策。”
不过，特朗普提出的全球关税政策遭到了联邦上诉法院的重大质疑。
According to The Guardian, on July 31, a panel of 11 judges from the U.S. Federal Circuit Court reviewed whether Trump’s “equal tariffs” exceeded legal authority and infringed upon presidential power excessively.
The judges repeatedly questioned whether Trump had a legitimate reason to rely on emergency powers, unilaterally amending the United States’ tariff schedule without consulting Congress.
The companies that filed the lawsuit accused the White House of orchestrating an “astonishing” coercive enforcement action, significantly different from any trade initiative attempted by previous U.S. administrations over the past two centuries. One judge also noted that
the International Economic Emergencies Powers Act (IEEPA), upon which Trump relied, did not even include the term “tariffs.”
Brett Shumate, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Litigation at the Department of Justice representing the government, stated to the court, “The government has been using IEEPA,” but admitted it was the first time it had used it to implement tariffs. He argued that the U.S. trade deficit had “reached a critical point,” prompting Trump to take emergency action, and pointed out that “this affects our military readiness and domestic manufacturing capabilities.”
Neal Katyal, the corporate attorney representing the side, directly stated that Trump had proposed “an extraordinary power that no president in two hundred years has dared to claim.” The executive branch essentially said, “Federal courts are powerless, and the president can do anything he wants as long as he declares an emergency.”
As of the time of writing, no decision has been made by the judges involved in the case. However, regardless of the outcome, it is expected that this case will eventually reach the Supreme Court of the United States.
If the Trump administration wins in court, it would gain immense power to tax or exempt foreign companies and individuals connected to the United States at will.
If the government loses, the prospects for Trump’s tariffs become uncertain.
Economists have warned that the new “equal tariffs” implemented by Trump will have a profound impact on the world economy and trade in the coming years, particularly having a greater impact on Asian economies.
According to the latest update of the World Economic Outlook report released by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on July 29th local time,
The current global economic activity is somewhat distorted due to the expectation of significantly increased tariffs. In the next two years, economic policy uncertainty will still threaten the stability of the world economy.
The IMF emphasized that practical cooperation among economies is crucial, and efforts should be made to reduce trade and investment barriers.
In response to the United States’ rampant use of tariffs, on August 1st, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jia Kun stated during a regular meeting,
China’s consistent and clear opposition to the unwarranted use of tariffs. A trade war or a trade war has no winners, and pursuing protectionism harms the interests of all parties involved.