Trump Eyes Wave of New Trade Deals Amid 90-Day Tariff Pause

[Social Media]

 

Trump Eyes Wave of New Trade Deals Amid 90-Day Tariff Pause

 

President Donald Trump is currently reviewing more than a dozen potential trade proposals from foreign governments, following his announcement last week of a 90-day hold on reciprocal tariffs. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Tuesday that the Trump administration has received offers from at least 15 countries, each seeking individualized trade arrangements with the United States.

 

“We’ve had more than 15 deals, pieces of paper, put on the table — proposals that are actively being considered,” Leavitt told reporters during her regular briefing. She did not disclose which nations had submitted offers but emphasized that the administration is weighing them seriously.

 

While no formal agreements have been finalized, Leavitt projected that announcements could come in the near future. “As we’ve said consistently, more than 75 countries have reached out,” she explained. “So there’s a lot of work to do. We very much understand that, but we also believe that we can announce some deals very soon.”

 

 

Among the countries speculated to be close to finalizing deals are India, Japan, and Vietnam, according to a White House official who spoke with The Post last week. These nations are seen as strong candidates for one-to-one trade arrangements with the U.S., designed to replace existing reciprocal tariffs with more tailored agreements.

 

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is actively pursuing trade pacts with other key allies, including Australia, South Korea, and the United Kingdom. These nations are said to have expressed a willingness to enter negotiations swiftly, signaling the administration’s preference to prioritize deals with longstanding partners.

 

Trump, who made the announcement on April 9, stated the pause in imposing additional tariffs would last until early July to give his economic team sufficient time to finalize negotiations. At the time, he said, “a deal is going to be made with every one of them.”

 

The group leading these negotiations includes several key figures: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, trade adviser Peter Navarro, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. Ultimately, Trump himself will have the final say on whether a proposal is accepted.

 

“We’ve got everybody in the trade team, and even deputies of people in the trade team, talking to just about everybody on Earth,” Hassett told Fox News on Monday. “I think that we’ve got more than 10 deals where there’s very good, amazing offers made to the US that Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Howard Lutnick and the rest of our trade team of the president are stewing over whether those deals are good enough.”

 

Hassett also noted that it’s not yet decided whether deals would be announced individually or as a group, suggesting the administration is weighing the political and economic impact of both approaches.

 

While talks with many nations are progressing, China remains the lone country still locked in a full-blown trade war with the United States. Both countries have raised tariffs on each other’s goods to as high as 125%. Trump made it clear that the next step is in Beijing’s hands.

 

“The ball is in China’s court,” he said in a statement shared by Leavitt. “China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them. There’s no difference between China and any other country, except they are much larger and China wants what we have — what every country wants that we have — the American consumer, or to put another way, they need our money.”

 

Based on a report by NYP  2025-04-17

 

 

[sharot724]

The UK probably will  not accept the terms LOL

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/starmer-told-uk-must-repeal-hate-speech-laws-to-protect-lgbt-people-or-lose-trump-trade-deal/ar-AA1CYEhO?ocid=socialshare&cvid=20f4003ed5a8486195c78d3b70598352&ei=105

[spidermike007]

Mr. Trump you're a great guy so smart, and very handsome. OK, we now have a trade deal? Easier than I thought. 

[Harrisfan]

Trump getting new deals. Great work

 

[Tom100]

Interesting take on the purpose of tariffs from Bangkok Resident Brian Berletic: "The US is preparing to subject its own population as well as those of its supposed “allies” to immense long-term economic, social, and political pain. "

 

[Chomper Higgot]

22 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Trump getting new deals. Great work

 

Are you still sticking to your view that the January 25 inflation rate was unacceptably high ?

[Tug]

Ok Donnie where’s the PROOF?not just sounds out of your mouth,real in writing eyes dotted on the line in writing proof?only maggas believe you and lots of them don’t anymore.the rest of us lucid Americans don’t trust you.ps that goes for the rest of the world.

[rough diamond]

44 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Trump getting new deals. Great work

 

Which ones has he got which are signed sealed and delivered.

[FlorC]

A good article , yes copy and paste , with a better view on the tariffs.

It is not that bad and anyone with a basic grasp of economics should know better.

 

The panic-peddlers are out in force, warning that such a tariff means retail prices will skyrocket 50%.  

 

Let’s make one thing clear: a tariff applies to the transaction value, not the final retail price.  The transaction value is what the importer pays the exporter, plus freight and insurance.  That cost is just the first step in a long supply chain.  By the time a product reaches the consumer, it’s been marked up to cover domestic shipping, warehousing, employee wages, utilities, sales tax, and profit margins for every hand it passes through.  The tariff is just one input among many.

 

Take a simple example.  

A retailer imports a widget with a $100 transaction value.  Add a 50% tariff, and the cost to the importer becomes $150.  That importer then sells it wholesale — perhaps at $200 — to a retailer, who marks it up again to $300 for sale.  That $50 tariff is now 16.7% of the retail price.  Even if every penny of the tariff is passed along, you’re not looking at a 50% increase in retail price — you’re looking at something closer to 17%.

 

But here’s the kicker: tariffs are not always fully passed on to the consumer.  Importers and retailers know they can’t raise prices beyond what the market will bear.  Sometimes they absorb part of the cost, cut expenses, renegotiate contracts, or shift to different suppliers.  The market reacts; it doesn’t just lie down and take it.

Still not convinced?  Look at the real-world data:

 

The National Bureau of Economic Research analyzed the 2018–2019 U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods.  They found that for every 10% tariff, retail prices rose 1–2%.  So even a 50% tariff, if applied, might cause retail prices to edge up 5–10% — not 50%.  That’s a far cry from the alarmist headlines.

So why do politicians and media outlets keep pushing the scare narrative?  Easy: Fear sells.

  

“Fifty percent” is a lot more dramatic than “maybe 5 to 10%.”  It’s easier to provoke outrage than to explain how pricing actually works.  They’re banking on the average person not understanding the difference between wholesale cost and retail price — or not caring enough to dig into the numbers.

Yes, tariffs matter.  They influence trade behavior.  They can increase some costs.  They can disrupt certain supply chains.  But they’re not some magic multiplier that doubles the price of your groceries or gadgets overnight.  

Anyone pushing that line is either economically illiterate or deliberately misleading you.

The next time you hear that a 50% tariff will mean a 50% price hike, don’t nod along.  Push back.  Ask for the math.  Demand the details.  

Because when it comes to tariffs and retail pricing, the facts just don’t support the hysteria.

 

Well put !

 

A lot of countries already made trade deals , more will follow.

For the rest , the tariffs won't be that bad , except maybe China.

 

[Purdey]

Why is the ball in China's court? They didn't start the trade war. China holds many cards and wears a suit.

[rough diamond]

28 minutes ago, FlorC said:

A lot of countries already made trade deals

Which ones have signed a deal since the tariff war started?

[RayC]

41 minutes ago, FlorC said:

A good article , yes copy and paste , with a better view on the tariffs.

It is not that bad and anyone with a basic grasp of economics should know better.

 

The panic-peddlers are out in force, warning that such a tariff means retail prices will skyrocket 50%.  

 

Let’s make one thing clear: a tariff applies to the transaction value, not the final retail price.  The transaction value is what the importer pays the exporter, plus freight and insurance.  That cost is just the first step in a long supply chain.  By the time a product reaches the consumer, it’s been marked up to cover domestic shipping, warehousing, employee wages, utilities, sales tax, and profit margins for every hand it passes through.  The tariff is just one input among many.

 

Take a simple example.  

A retailer imports a widget with a $100 transaction value.  Add a 50% tariff, and the cost to the importer becomes $150.  That importer then sells it wholesale — perhaps at $200 — to a retailer, who marks it up again to $300 for sale.  That $50 tariff is now 16.7% of the retail price.  Even if every penny of the tariff is passed along, you’re not looking at a 50% increase in retail price — you’re looking at something closer to 17%.

 

But here’s the kicker: tariffs are not always fully passed on to the consumer.  Importers and retailers know they can’t raise prices beyond what the market will bear.  Sometimes they absorb part of the cost, cut expenses, renegotiate contracts, or shift to different suppliers.  The market reacts; it doesn’t just lie down and take it.

Still not convinced?  Look at the real-world data:

 

The National Bureau of Economic Research analyzed the 2018–2019 U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods.  They found that for every 10% tariff, retail prices rose 1–2%.  So even a 50% tariff, if applied, might cause retail prices to edge up 5–10% — not 50%.  That’s a far cry from the alarmist headlines.

So why do politicians and media outlets keep pushing the scare narrative?  Easy: Fear sells.

  

“Fifty percent” is a lot more dramatic than “maybe 5 to 10%.”  It’s easier to provoke outrage than to explain how pricing actually works.  They’re banking on the average person not understanding the difference between wholesale cost and retail price — or not caring enough to dig into the numbers.

Yes, tariffs matter.  They influence trade behavior.  They can increase some costs.  They can disrupt certain supply chains.  But they’re not some magic multiplier that doubles the price of your groceries or gadgets overnight.  

Anyone pushing that line is either economically illiterate or deliberately misleading you.

The next time you hear that a 50% tariff will mean a 50% price hike, don’t nod along.  Push back.  Ask for the math.  Demand the details.  

Because when it comes to tariffs and retail pricing, the facts just don’t support the hysteria.

 

Well put !

 

A lot of countries already made trade deals , more will follow.

For the rest , the tariffs won't be that bad , except maybe China.

 

 

So in a nutshell, tariffs may reduce demand and/or cause inflation and/or reduce profits.

[impulse]

10 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

So in a nutshell, tariffs may reduce demand and/or cause inflation and/or reduce profits.

 

Is reducing demand for imported stuff a bad thing in a country that imports about $1 Trillion more than we export a year?  Especially a country that's $35 Trillion in debt already.

 

I'm as guilty as anyone, always looking for a good deal on a big screen that's 5" bigger than the perfectly good one I already own.  But it's not like the quality of my life will go in the toilet if the price of a 5" upgrade increases.  I'll keep watching the one that's 20x the square area of what I grew up with and I'll be okay.

 

And that's even more true if we replace imported stuff with stuff that's made in the USA.

 

[FlorC]

22 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

So in a nutshell, tariffs may reduce demand and/or cause inflation and/or reduce profits.

It means that MSM , people and stock markets over react to the tariffs and meanwhile

many countries are making trade deals.

No fear mongering needed.

[FlorC]

40 minutes ago, rough diamond said:

Which ones have signed a deal since the tariff war started?

More than 50 last time . Ask Trump. 

[rough diamond]

2 minutes ago, FlorC said:

More than 50 last time . Ask Trump. 

I don't trust a word from Trump.

I asked for which ones have been signed.

Trump has only said that they are in discussions.  He has NOT claimed, to my knowledge, of a single agreed deal.

 

[RayC]

10 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Is reducing demand for imported stuff a bad thing in a country that imports about $1 Trillion more than we export a year?  Especially a ciutry that's $35 Trillion in debt already.

 

I'm as guilty as anyone, always looking for a good deal on a big screen that's 5" bigger than the perfectly good one I already own.  But it's not like the quality of my life will go in the toilet if the price of a 5" upgrade increases.  I'll keep watching the one that's 20x the square area of what I grew up with and I'll be okay.

 

And that's even more true if we replace imported stuff with stuff that's made in the USA.

 

 

The US has a surplus of +/-$400 pa on service exports, so the overall BoP deficit is closer to $600m. Nevertheless, that is still a significant figure. 

 

Is this a problem? Given that the US is the world's leading economy and the dollar is the world's reserve currency, I would answer, 'No'. Things were (relatively) stable: However, imo Trump's international trade strategy - i.e. the blanket use of tariffs - threatens that stability, and I would suggest that the negatives associated with this strategy for both the US and the world in general e.g. a contraction in demand, reduced profits, etc,  overweigh the potential benefits such as a reduction in the US debt burden.

[RayC]

17 minutes ago, FlorC said:

It means that MSM , people and stock markets over react to the tariffs and meanwhile

many countries are making trade deals.

No fear mongering needed.

 

So do you agree or not? Tariffs - especially applied in the 'blanket' way proposed - may reduce demand and/or cause inflation and/or reduce profits? If so, why is worth running this risk?

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, rough diamond said:

Which ones has he got which are signed sealed and delivered.

One can only hope that it is none, any that have signed have been conned.

From the AI.

• TTIP and ISDS:

  The proposed TTIP between the US and EU sparked a debate about ISDS, with the EU initially proposing a permanent investment court and the US advocating for ISDS, which has been a common feature in many trade agreements. 

   
• EU's perspective:

  The EU, while supporting ISDS in general, expressed concerns about its potential impact on the ability of governments to regulate in the public interest and sought to reform the system, potentially through a permanent investment court. 

   
• US's perspective:

  The US viewed ISDS as vital for protecting investors' rights and the enforceability of trade agreements. 

   
• Negotiation Status:

  The TTIP negotiations, which were ongoing for several years, ultimately ended without a finalized agreement, including a resolution on ISDS. 

   
• Current Status:

  There is no formal trade agreement between the US and EU that includes ISDS. 

[HappyExpat57]

The market thrives on stability. This is the OPPOSITE of stability. Yay winning so much!

[sandyf]

35 minutes ago, rough diamond said:

I don't trust a word from Trump.

I asked for which ones have been signed.

Trump has only said that they are in discussions.  He has NOT claimed, to my knowledge, of a single agreed deal.

 

There is a saying based on a wooden horse.

 

"The concerns have been raised after sources close to the Trump administration claimed vice-president JD Vance wants the UK to repeal hate speech laws and ditch plans for a new online safety law in exchange for a trade deal that could see the UK avoid tariffs."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trump-free-speech-trade-deal-online-safety-b2734397.html?lid=7g2u8hk0ed8c&utm_medium=email&utm_source=braze&utm_campaign=Morning Headlines Newsletter 17-04-2025&utm_term=IND_Headlines_Masterlist_CDP&empar=3ecb0a14961159ae2d4bc396450ec9796a1489f400e007e352cda343bc7b577c

[Eric Loh]

8 hours ago, Social Media said:

“The ball is in China’s court,” he said in a statement shared by Leavitt. “China needs to make a deal with us. We don’t have to make a deal with them

This kind of condescending statement will only hardened China to put off any negotiation. Arrogance of Trump to boast that countries rush to kiss his butt for a trade deal and hillbilly Vance calling Chinese peasants will not sit well with China. China has responded that they are open to talks if US shows respect. The days of arrogance by Trump and his surrogates are numbered as countries are beginning to exclude USA in new trade alliances. China hold many of the trump cards (no pun intended). 

[rough diamond]

18 minutes ago, sandyf said:

There is a saying based on a wooden horse.

What has that got to do with either my post or the Topic in general?

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, FlorC said:

It means that MSM , people and stock markets over react to the tariffs and meanwhile

many countries are making trade deals.

No fear mongering needed.

Please list the countries who have signed a trade deal with America.

 

You seem to forget or omit the fact bond markets are tanking as well, and gold is at record highs.

 

Even during the Great Depression, Treasury bonds were stable. What's happening with them now is unprecedented.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, FlorC said:

More than 50 last time . Ask Trump. 

As Mandy Rice-Davies once said, " Well, he would say that, wouldn't he".

 

Where did you buy your rose-colored glasses?

[Eric Loh]

So Trump has 90 days to do 150 trade deals. Financial markets aren't buying it. Stocks, bonds and dollar tanking. He was handed a economy envied by the world by Biden and he is ruining the country and lives of the people. Only his oligarchy buddies will come out oif this economic mess smiling all the way to the bank. This is the most corrupted government in USA history. 

[impulse]

3 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Please list the countries who have signed a trade deal with America.

 

You seem to forget or omit the fact bond markets are tanking as well, and gold is at record highs.

 

Even during the Great Depression, Treasury bonds were stable. What's happening with them now is unprecedented.

 

Do you honestly believe these deals could have been negotiated and approved through a country's legal process in the month or so since Trump started making tariff waves (this round of them)?

 

Over 70 countries have come to the negotiating table.  It may be months before any agreements are finalized.

 

I watched a UK interview with Sebastion Gorka and though it was contentious, he did a great job explaining that Trump has just reset the baseline negotiating situation after decades of unequal trade deals for the US.  Nothing is cast in stone.  It's just a starting point for negotiations.  And the guys on the other side of the table have 90 days to think about it.

 

He also claimed that Trump 45 raised tariffs and studies showed that retail prices went up by less than 1% as a result.  The sky isn't falling.

 

But America won't be doing unequal trading any more.

 

[rough diamond]

8 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

As Mandy Rice-Davies once said, " Well, he would say that, wouldn't he".

 

Where did you buy your rose-colored glasses?

The same place as his MAGA headphones I assume!

[save the frogs]

11 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Please list the countries who have signed a trade deal with America.

reviewing proposals.

and some deals will likely be made within the 90 day pause.

 

but you people want instant gratification or you bark incessantly. 

please stop barking for the next 90 days on this issue and wait, will you? 

 

[save the frogs]

11 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

He was handed a economy envied by the world by Biden

Seems like he was handed trade deals that were out of balance, but I'm no expert.