Analysis by Report.az | August 2025
Former U.S. President Donald Trump has reasserted his signature aggressive trade approach, using tariffs as leverage to extract economic and political concessions from partners worldwide. In the months following his 2024 re-election, Trump has pushed for new trade deals, threatening steep import duties and setting an August 1 deadline for renegotiations.
EU: Painful Compromise Disguised as Deal
Trump forced the EU into a trade agreement that reduced threatened tariffs from 30% to 15%—but at a high cost. Brussels agreed to:
-
Buy $750 billion in U.S. energy by 2028
-
Invest $600 billion into the U.S. economy
-
Eliminate tariffs on U.S. imports to the EU
European leaders called the deal one-sided. Germany and Italy labeled it a “forced compromise,” while French opposition called it a “black day” for Europe. Analysts predict a 0.2% GDP contraction and rising inflation due to increased energy costs.
UK: Better Terms for Loyalty
The UK secured softer terms—10% tariffs and $50 billion in U.S. energy purchases—after pledging $100 billion in U.S. investments and political alignment on BRICS. Still, British businesses fear limited access to non-U.S. markets.
South Korea: Paid Concession
Originally facing 25% tariffs, Seoul agreed to:
-
Buy $100 billion in U.S. energy
-
Invest $350 billion in U.S. industries
In return, tariffs were reduced to 15%. South Korean experts described the deal as an expensive avoidance of a trade war.
Japan: The Costliest Agreement
Japan committed to $550 billion in U.S. investments and opened its markets widely. Tariffs on U.S. imports were set at 15%. Observers called it extremely lopsided.
Gulf States: Preemptive Payoffs
Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar pledged over $900 billion in U.S. investments. Qatar even gifted Trump a $400 million private jet. These moves helped them secure a basic 10% tariff level and avoid harsher penalties.
India & BRICS: Rising Pressure
India now faces 25% tariffs due to ties with Russia and refusal to distance from BRICS. Trump accused India of being a “dead economy” and imposed a “penalty” for Russian cooperation. Negotiations remain tense.
Brazil: Sanctions with a Political Twist
Trump imposed 50% tariffs, citing national security threats tied to Brazil’s political stance and BRICS membership. He declared a “national emergency” over Brazilian policy, intertwining trade with geopolitics.
China: Cold Pause in a Hot War
Trump’s earlier 145% tariffs were met with China’s 125% countermeasures. Talks have led to a 3-month pause, not resolution. The outcome of this prolonged standoff could reshape global trade norms.
Conclusion: Trump’s Business-First Diplomacy
Trump’s trade policy mirrors a hardline business strategy: escalate tension, impose threat, then negotiate down—framing it as a victory. While this approach has secured short-term gains for the U.S., it raises doubts about trust in global trade norms and long-term investment fulfillment.
With China as the lone counterweight, and other nations opting to “pay for peace,” the Trump tariff doctrine may redefine how global economic pressure translates into political influence.
