Trump's bespoke trade deal with UK sets little precedent for other nations

President Trump made a deal. Now comes the hard part: getting more.
Trump agreed to a framework for a trade agreement with the U.K., giving his administration momentum as it faces pressure to notch scores more to avoid hurting American consumers. But the deal was limited in scope and included niche issues regarding the U.K., meaning it didn't offer other nations a clear road map to follow, foreign officials said.
Many other deals weren't seen as likely to come together so easily. The U.K. was low-hanging fruit, given the U.S. enjoys a goods trade surplus with the country, unlike with China, America's third-largest trading partner for goods in 2024, according to the Census Bureau. Imports from China are currently subject to a whopping 145% levy.
In a sign of how eager Trump was for a win in the trade conflicts, he called U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer late Wednesday to finalize the details. Starmer was watching his favorite soccer team, Arsenal, play a crucial European game at the time, according to the prime minister, who said he hadn't planned to announce a trade deal on Thursday.
'They are keen to show they are making progress," said Myron Brilliant, a senior counselor at DGA Group. 'These are signals to the market. It's better to have a step forward than a step back. But they are going to have to demonstrate these deals are going to end up with sustaining commitments on both sides."
While analysts questioned the significance of the deal, Trump, who has shown frustration with questions over his trade agenda and the global turbulence it has created, cast it as historic. His team said the deal would unlock billions for U.S. exporters. The Trump administration agreed to roll back tariffs imposed on British steel and automobiles in exchange for the U.K.'s purchasing Boeing jets and giving American farmers greater access to U.K. markets. The U.S. also agreed to allow Rolls-Royce jet engines and parts to be imported tariff-free.
Trump expressed confidence in reaching agreements with other countries, notably China. The president, though, showed no sign of backing entirely away from his tariff agenda as he seeks to rebalance global trade.
'One lesson from the U.S.-U.K. announcement is that all of America's trading partners are likely to face at minimum a 10% tariff," said National Foreign Trade Council President Jake Colvin. 'That alone would result in a permanent fourfold increase from the average U.S. tariff of 2.4% in 2024, which is a scenario that was nearly unthinkable just a year ago."
President Trump touted the trade deal between the U.S. and U.K. from the Oval Office on Thursday.
The nature of the U.K. agreement shows how Trump is willing to bypass traditional trade pacts that can take several years to hammer out. The move also highlighted the soft power of the U.K.; Trump is a keen Anglophile who has in the past said he thought a deal could be worked out.
Foreign partners generally viewed Thursday's news as positive but didn't see how its contours directly applied to their own talks, officials said.
Trump is dispatching Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to Switzerland this weekend for high-stakes talks with officials from China. The two nations have effectively closed trading through massive retaliatory tariffs.
For Chinese officials, what's notable in the limited deal Trump struck with the U.K. is that it doesn't appear to have any details about the two countries aligning to isolate China—a stated goal by Trump advisers for the administration's trade negotiations with various nations.
The lack of such details, at least for now, is likely to bolster China's position as senior officials from both sides meet in Switzerland. Meanwhile, even though Trump told reporters Thursday that he expects the coming U.S.-China meeting to be 'substantive," Beijing is treating it largely as an opportunity to present its position and gauge the administration's intentions.
In particular, Chinese officials view it as a chance to figure out whether the Trump administration—and Trump himself—intend to pursue a deal that could help put the brakes on the current trend of decoupling between the U.S. and China. If those talks with China go well, Trump suggested the tariffs could come down. 'We're going to see. Right now you can't get any higher. It's at 145% so we know it's coming down," he said.
A European Union diplomat said it could be helpful to get a sense from the U.K. of what worked in negotiating with the U.S. But the diplomat added the U.K. market is much smaller than the EU's and is more unified compared with the bloc's 27 member states.
A spokeswoman for Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, who visited with Trump this week, didn't respond to a request for comment on the implications of the U.S.-U.K. framework. Bank of Nova Scotia economist Derek Holt said the U.S. runs a goods trade surplus with the U.K., and hence hasn't found itself 'in the same crosshairs of the Trump administration as other countries," such as Canada.
Mark Warner, a trade lawyer who practices in Toronto and the U.S., said Canada faces a tougher haul because of the range of issues outstanding, such as automobiles, dairy production, and Canada's digital services tax. Plus, he said, Carney 'has adopted a more contentious approach to trade negotiations with a lot of red lines and no evident openings for compromise in a minority Parliament." The U.S. is also engaged with a range of other nations, including India and Japan.
Juan Carlos Baker, who was Mexico's deputy trade minister during the negotiations for the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement signed in late 2018, said the deal with the U.K. is in no way comparable to the deeper trade relationship the U.S. has with Mexico.
Mexico shipped almost three million vehicles to the U.S. and supplied 40% of U.S. auto parts last year.
A coming review of the USMCA is more complex and negotiations can extend for years, Baker said. 'Even with the best will, such an agreement doesn't come out overnight in any way," said Baker, who participated in USMCA trade negotiations with the U.S. and Canada for about two years.
In the initial aftermath of the April 2 'Liberation Day" tariffs announcement and the subsequent 90-day pause, Trump and top administration officials predicted a wave of deals. Trump in recent days has expressed frustration with questions on when deals will land.
'Everyone says, 'When, when, when are you going to sign deals?'" the president told reporters during his Tuesday meeting with Carney. 'We don't have to sign deals, they have to sign deals with us."
Write to Alex Leary at alex.leary@wsj.com, Lingling Wei at Lingling.Wei@wsj.com and Paul Vieira at Paul.Vieira@wsj.com

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Hindu

4 minutes ago

• The Hindu

Who is FA Cup champion Crystal Palace's new owner?

FA Cup 2024-25 winner Crystal Palace is set to have a new owner named Robert Wood 'Woody' Johnson. Johnson, who is an American businessman and the co-owner of NFL franchise New York Jets, has signed a binding agreement to buy Eagle Football Holding's stake in Crystal Palace, the Premier League club said on Monday We can confirm that Robert Wood Johnson "Woody" has signed a legally binding contract to purchase Eagle Football's holding in the club. Full club statement ⤵️#CPFC — Crystal Palace F.C. (@CPFC) June 23, 2025 The deal is subject to approval from the Premier League and the Women's Super League. Johnson, co-owner of the NFL's New York Jets and former U.S. ambassador to the United Kingdom, is set to become a partner and director at Palace. The London-based club was previously part-owned by another American businessman John Textor, who has signed an agreement to sell his stake. The deal is believed to be worth close to £190m.

NDTV

9 minutes ago

• NDTV

The Latest G7 Was A Disaster, Thanks To Trump

As expected, the G7 summit in Kananaskis in Canada proved somewhat of a disaster for the group. With the deep differences between the US and the other six members from Trump's first term getting accentuated after his re-election, the prognostics for this summit were, in any case, not good. The European leaders were openly against Trump's re-election. This lack of empathy between him and the other six members was bound to affect the solidarity of the G7 at Kananaskis. This solidarity had actually got reinforced on the security front under the Biden administration by the overwhelming hostility of the G7 countries towards Russia over the Ukraine conflict. With Trump disowning Biden's Russia policy, spurning President Volodymyr Zelensky and initiating a dialogue with Russia to end the war and explore the possibility of normalising ties with Moscow, the rift with Europe has become deeper, with the latter remaining bent on supporting Ukraine with arms and funds to counter Russia. The Growing Rift Other than this fundamental security issue in the eyes of Europe, Trump's use of tariffs as a weapon against other members of the G7 totally contrary to World Trade Organization (WTO) provisions, has deeply soured US ties with them. The original objective of the G7 was to promote financial and economic stability at the global level. We now see that the US seeks to disrupt this objective by US-centric policies premised on the belief that the country has been the victim of unfair trade practices and that its economy has been hollowed out because its partners have not shared equally security burdens at the global level. The slogan 'Make America Great Again' is at the cost of US allies, too. The US and the other G7 members are, therefore, not on the same page on strategic political, economic and security issues. The G7's raison d'être is being undermined by the US under Trump. The Tensions With Canada Adding to all this is Trump's contemptuous attitude towards Canada, the host of the G7 meeting. The new Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, has been combative and has sought to hit back at the US on tariffs and other economic measures. This did not necessarily provide a more conducive setting for the G7 summit. However, as host - and in order to save the summit - Carney tried to ingratiate himself to Trump, flattering him by saying publicly that "The G7 is nothing without U.S. leadership, your personal leadership". This, however, did not work. Trump snubbed the G7 by departing early because of some momentous decision he had to make - presumably on Iran- and dispensing with planned bilateral meetings, including with President Zelensky. The meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi also could not take place (The chance to clear the air personally after many loose statements by Trump on his role in bringing about a ceasefire between India and Pakistan and his desire to mediate on Kashmir was missed. India, therefore, decided to make a statement publicly countering Trump's false narratives on his role and firmly reject any mediatory role by him). A Short, Thin Statement Given all these differences, the other six members had come to terms with the fact that it would not be possible to issue a joint communique, and that a Chair's summary would be issued instead. If the expectation was that the Chair's summary would spell out robustly the united position of six members on issues over which the US differed, it has been belied. It was probably thought that it was not advisable to isolate the US in this manner. The Chair's summary is short and terse. It contrasts dramatically with the inordinately lengthy communique; of last year's G7 summit in Italy, which had a total of about 240 paragraphs and sub-paragraphs, with 18 on Ukraine, 10 on Gaza, four each on Iran and Africa, 14 on Sustainable Development Goals, 16 on the Indo-Pacific, nine on China, 26 on energy and climate change, 10 on the global economy and finance, eight on trade, 14 on economic resilience and economic security, and nine on health. The Chair's summary at Kananaskis, in contrast, has only 14 paragraphs. This shows how much the ambit and substance of this G7 summit got reduced due to the Trump factor. The Chair's summary lists issues of concern, such as the need for greater economic and financial stability, technological innovation, an open and predictable trading regime, energy security and the digital transition underpinned by secure and responsible critical mineral supply chains, and more collaboration within and beyond the G7. With China in mind, the G7 leaders have undertaken to safeguard their economies from unfair non-market policies and practices that distort markets and drive overcapacity. This would include de-risking through diversification and reduction of critical dependencies. The new Canada-led G7 initiative - the Critical Minerals Production Alliance - is mentioned. This would aim at working with trusted international partners to guarantee supply for advanced manufacturing and defence. In the single paragraph on Ukraine, the G7 leaders have accommodated Trump by expressing support for his efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in the country. This is a remarkable turnabout because Europe is, in fact, deeply opposed to Trump's peace efforts, which exclude it. Zelensky has been thrown a crumb by recognising that Ukraine is committed to an unconditional ceasefire to which Russia must agree, adding that the G7 Leaders are resolute in exploring all options to maximise pressure on Russia, including financial sanctions. Nothing On Middle East, Divisions Over China The para on the Middle East is devoid of any real substance, with the G7 leaders reiterating the importance of unhindered humanitarian aid to Gaza, the release of all hostages, an immediate and permanent ceasefire, and the need for a negotiated political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that achieves lasting peace (no mention of a two-state solution). The leaders exchanged views on "the active conflict between Israel and Iran", affirming Israel's right to defend itself, and were clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. The G7 released a statement on recent developments between Israel and Iran, which essentially reiterates these bare points. On China, Trump and the six others are not entirely on the same page, but some concerns are shared. The G7 leaders, while stressing the importance of constructive and stable relations with China, have called on it to refrain from market distortions and harmful overcapacity. They discussed their ongoing serious concerns about China's destabilising activities in the East and South China Seas and the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. The leaders acknowledged the links between crisis theatres in Ukraine, the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific. What these links are is not clear. The Irony With 'Foreign Interference' According to the Chair's summary, the G7 leaders condemned foreign interference, underlining the unacceptable threat of transnational repression to rights and freedoms, national security and state sovereignty. The irony is that foreign interference and threats to national security and state sovereignty primarily emanate from the G7 countries themselves, as we experience in India ourselves. With Trump having walked out of the Paris Climate Change agreement, it is not surprising that the only indirect reference to climate change is the discussion by the G7 on the impact of increasingly extreme weather events around the world. On the G7 meeting with invited leaders, including India, the focus was on ways to collaborate on energy security, just energy transitions as well as sustainable and innovative solutions to boost energy access and affordability, mitigating the impact on climate and the environment, technology and innovation, diversifying and strengthening critical mineral supply chains, building infrastructure, and mobilising investment. The G7 leaders have agreed to collaborate with partners on concrete outcomes, to which end they agreed to six joint statements, including securing high-standard critical mineral supply chains, driving secure, responsible and trustworthy AI adoption, boosting cooperation on quantum technology, etc. India is already engaged in discussions in all these areas with most of the G7 members. PM Modi's Interventions: Energy And Terrorism At the summit, Prime Minister Narendra Modi made two interventions. He spoke of India's energy security plans and ambitions, noting that at present, renewable energy accounts for about 50% of our total installed capacity. He also mentioned India's launch of global initiatives such as the International Solar Alliance, Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, Mission LiFE, Global Biofuels Alliance, One Sun One World One Grid. India, he said, considered it its responsibility to bring the priorities and concerns of the Global South to the world stage. Not surprisingly, the Prime Minister drew the attention of G7 leaders to the grave issue of terrorism bluntly and forcefully. He recalled the Pahalgam attack and spoke of India's neighbourhood becoming a breeding ground of terrorism. He reminded the leaders that there must be no place for double standards when it came to terrorism, and that any country that supported terrorism must be held accountable. He regretted that the reality was quite the opposite. He challenged the G7 leaders when he said: "On the one hand, we are quick to impose various sanctions based on our own preferences and interests. On the other hand, nations that openly support terrorism continue to be rewarded. I have some serious questions for those present in this room". In his second intervention, Prime Minister Modi spoke about technology, AI, and energy. For AI's energy needs, India, he said, was focusing on solar energy and small modular reactors. He pointed out that AI models developed and tested against the benchmark of India's diversity will hold immense relevance and utility for the entire world. The G7 summit provided him with an opportunity to meet the Canadian Prime Minister bilaterally and discuss the state of India-Canada relations and the way ahead. The two leaders agreed to take calibrated and constructive steps to restore stability in the relationship, beginning with the early return of High Commissioners to each other's capitals, restarting senior ministerial as well as working-level engagements across various domains, and exploring opportunities for future collaboration in various areas. The importance of restarting the stalled negotiations on the Early Progress Trade Agreement (EPTA) was flagged. Although the G7 summit was a bit of a damp squib because of internal cracks within the group between the US and others, the invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, despite serious bilateral differences with Canada, was a continued recognition of India's mounting global geopolitical and economic importance.

Hindustan Times

10 minutes ago

• Hindustan Times

Iran's retaliatory attack to US strikes possible in a day or two: Report

The President Donald Trump-led US administration is bracing for a possible Iranian retaliation to the weekend strikes carried out by the United States on three Iranian nuclear facilities - Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan. File image: Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's grandson, Hassan Khomeini stands next to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (REUTERS) While the US is apparently still seeking a diplomatic resolution, it assesses that Iran could carry out retaliatory attacks targeting American forces in the Middle East as soon as next day or two. Follow Israel Iran conflict live updates Two US officials spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity on Monday and said Iran's retaliatory attack could happen within the next day or two. Iran has threatened to retaliate after US bombed its nuclear sites over the weekend, which Donald Trump said 'completely and totally obliterated" the Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities targeted. US strikes Iran The US on Saturday struck three Iranian nuclear sites – Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan – using bunker-buster bombs, with President Donald Trump asking Iran to agree to 'end the war' after the 'historic moment for the United States of America, Israel and the world'. Confirming the strikes, US President Trump first posted on Truth Social, 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter.' In another post, Donald Trump wrote, 'I will be giving an Address to the Nation at 10:00 P.M., at the White House, regarding our very successful military operation in Iran. This is an HISTORIC MOMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ISRAEL, AND THE WORLD. IRAN MUST NOW AGREE TO END THIS WAR. THANK YOU!' With the strikes, the US officially joined the Israeli campaign against Iran directly. In his address to nation over the US strikes on Iran, Donald Trump said, 'Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' Reacting to the US strikes, Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called the bombing campaign Israel launched on June 13 "a big mistake". "The Zionist enemy... is being punished right now," Khamenei wrote on social media.