LOCKED IN? AH, ALITLE LOOSEY,GOOSEY.....

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/28/...n-five-key-takeaways


1. Some uncertainty remains for now

The US will keep in place a 50% tariff on steel and aluminium according to Trump, although European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said the tariffs on steel could be replaced with a quota system with further negotiation.

There was also confusion over pharmaceuticals after Trump said the sector would not be included, however a senior US official later confirmed that they were in fact covered by the 15% tariff.

According to von der Leyen, zero tariffs will apply to a range of sectors including “all aircraft and component parts, certain chemicals, certain generics, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, natural resources and critical raw materials”. But there was ongoing uncertainty for some industries – Sunday’s announcement did not clear up what tariffs European wine and spirits producers will face in the US.
2. Trump could yet change the terms of the deal

Carsten Nickel, deputy director of research at Teneo, said Sunday’s accord was “merely a high-level, political agreement” that could not replace a carefully hammered out trade deal: “This, in turn, creates the risk of different interpretations along the way, as seen immediately after the conclusion of the US-Japan deal.”

On Sunday, a senior US administration official told reporters in Washington that Trump retained the ability to increase the tariffs in the future if European countries do not live up to the investment commitments contained in the deal.


WAIT AND WATCH...."MERELY A HI LEVEL POLITICAL AGREEMENT....NOT HAMMERED OUT.....concrete and solid...ah, NO

You act like the whole world was tariff free before President Trump was elected to his second term.

Tariffs and protectionism has always been very common. Even after NAFTA was signed, we found out that it had hundreds of exemptions and left some tariffs intact.

Trade deals are constantly being hammered out around the world.

FredHayek wrote: You act like the whole world was tariff free before President Trump was elected to his second term.

Tariffs and protectionism has always been very common. Even after NAFTA was signed, we found out that it had hundreds of exemptions and left some tariffs intact.

Trade deals are constantly being hammered out around the world.

FOR THE MOST PART BY DIPLOMACY....NOT BY RAPID AND RIGID THREAT......THIS HAS NOT BEEN ''HAMMERED OUT''..... FROM THE SOURCES I READ, IT IS A AGREEMENT IN THE PROCESS OF BEING SOLIDIFIED...IN OTHER WORDS, THE CZAR HAS SAID IT IS SO, BUT THERE R EMPTY GAPS OF AGREEMENT/ACCEPTANCE. ...WHEN ALL IS ON PAPER AND AGREEMENT IS SATISFIED,THEN AND ONLY THEN IS IT SO......WAIT AND WATCH

Do you or do you not want Trump to succeed when it comes to Tariffs?

A simple yes or no would suffice.

Personally I am hoping that the world comes to realize we are all better off without tariffs and excessive regulations, but I doubt that will ever happen.

Iowa corn farmers don't want to compete with foreign sugarcane growers.

American car companies don't want to compete with Chinese EV's.

And consumer advocates don't want to see substandard Chinese vehicles on American roads.

There is a reason the Allied powers won WW II . . . and in the years since that victory these United States have been voluntarily surrendering those reasons to foreign, sometimes hostile, powers. To survive we need to be able to produce what we need ourselves. Germany and Japan lost their quest because they couldn't produce what was necessary for victory . . . energy, steel, munitions, aircraft, ships, vehicles, clothing, and food. We need steel mills, we need manufacturing, we need textiles, we need farmers and ranchers who can produce enough to feed us. After giving it all away in the 1990's via bad trade agreements, we're about to get some of it back as the result of good trade deals.

You see, it doesn't matter if the KIA plant, or the Toyota plant, or the Subaru plant is foreign owned, because they are here, on US soil, and they can be put to use to protect and defend our union if necessary. But if we don't have those plants, or meat processing, or textile manufacturing, or mining, or energy production domestically, then we are the ones who, like Germany and Japan, needed to obtain those resources elsewhere to survive.

That is not a recipe for the survival of the last, best, hope, and the birthplace of the society, of individual liberty and freedom on this planet.

Rick wrote: Do you or do you not want Trump to succeed when it comes to Tariffs?

A simple yes or no would suffice.

WHAT DO I WANT? A EQUITABLE AGREEMENT(BY BOTH ENTITIES) THAT IS NOT A SHAKE DOWN/THREAT BY ONE EGOCENTRIC,ONLY I CAN FIX IT, ANOINTED BY GOD HIMSELF LEADER.

We haven't had equitable agreements for the last 40 years . . . and the egocentric leader we currently have is perhaps the best chance we've had for the last 40 years of having equitable agreements.

So you don't care about the outcome, you only care about the process? How many people have you voted for that even talked about balancing our trade deficits? The reality is that you haven't heard anyone on your side talking about the trade deficit because there is no grievance or oppression angle that would rile up the Dem's low info/IQ voters.

Nobody on your side ever had the will to tackle the problem, therefore, nobody on your side would ever have the ability to solve the problem.

You don't seem to understand that our trade imbalance is a result of past administration's stupidity. And what is an "equitable agreement", other than all countries agreeing that there should be no tariffs at all? If Trump gets better trade deals that help us manufacture more of our own products and allows au to sell more of our products overseas, how is that a bad thing?