The Trump administration continues to push for what it terms "deals" with global trading partners, opening negotiations prior to the imposition of higher tariffs scheduled for August 1. However, the president's definition of a trade deal has become increasingly ambiguous. For Trump, the term now seems to encompass a wide array of agreements, including those requiring minimal consent or involvement from other nations.
Traditional trade deals are typically extensive, often spanning hundreds of pages and requiring years of negotiation, but the Trump administration has been using the label more liberally. An example is the framework deal with Britain announced in May; this simplistic agreement is just a handful of pages long and still requires substantial negotiation to finalize many of its terms.
Moreover, in a recent communication via Truth Social, Trump referred to a recently announced handshake agreement with Vietnam as part of a “Great Deal of Cooperation,” suggesting a reduction of tariffs on Vietnamese goods to 20 percent. However, as of now, no detailed texts or summaries regarding the specifics of this agreement have surfaced from either nation.
Additionally, Trump has characterized the recently reached truce with China as a “trade deal.” In reality, this agreement merely represented a mutual understanding to reverse previously implemented tariffs and retaliatory measures rather than implementing concrete changes to trade rules.
During a cabinet meeting at the White House, Trump even labeled one-sided letters sent to various countries communicating new tariff rates as "deals," despite these not being consensual agreements but rather notifications of unilateral decisions. This new interpretation of trade agreements creates uncertainty and raises concerns regarding the stability of global trade relations.
Traditional trade deals are typically extensive, often spanning hundreds of pages and requiring years of negotiation, but the Trump administration has been using the label more liberally. An example is the framework deal with Britain announced in May; this simplistic agreement is just a handful of pages long and still requires substantial negotiation to finalize many of its terms.
Moreover, in a recent communication via Truth Social, Trump referred to a recently announced handshake agreement with Vietnam as part of a “Great Deal of Cooperation,” suggesting a reduction of tariffs on Vietnamese goods to 20 percent. However, as of now, no detailed texts or summaries regarding the specifics of this agreement have surfaced from either nation.
Additionally, Trump has characterized the recently reached truce with China as a “trade deal.” In reality, this agreement merely represented a mutual understanding to reverse previously implemented tariffs and retaliatory measures rather than implementing concrete changes to trade rules.
During a cabinet meeting at the White House, Trump even labeled one-sided letters sent to various countries communicating new tariff rates as "deals," despite these not being consensual agreements but rather notifications of unilateral decisions. This new interpretation of trade agreements creates uncertainty and raises concerns regarding the stability of global trade relations.
