President Trump wants 'fair and reciprocal' trade, not radical transformation
President Trump is a dealmaker and a pragmatist, not an ideologue.
In the aftermath of “Liberation Day,” the entire world has been scrambling to figure out what exactly President Trump is pursuing as his end game with global trade. On Monday afternoon, the president provided significant and necessary clarity on his intentions for America’s position in the global economy.
Please check out The Dossier’s curated recommendations. It helps support our work!
Sign up for 1440, it's 100% free.
Financial markets have noticeably slumped over previous trading days (though on Monday, the Nasdaq closed even), given the announced sweeping imposition of American tariffs on any and all foreign countries. The president’s top administration officials and surrogates — Peter Navarro, Howard Lutnick, Elon Musk, and Scott Bessent — have all been singing different tunes, adding to the confusion and speculation. Many permanently online sycophantic voices have even taken to suggesting that the president is determined to radically reorient global trade itself. Well, it turns out that the president doesn’t share the sentiments of the ideologues.
On Monday, we received lots of much-needed clarity about the president’s plan of action. The President held a press gaggle with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, during which he detailed his intentions for rebalancing global trade.
Two key words best capture the president’s intentions: “fair and reciprocal.”
More than anything, the president expressed that he wants better deals for American exporters. Specifically, he wants foreign countries to grant American companies access to their markets, citing Japan, China, and European countries that he felt were creating unfair conditions for U.S. exports.
Contrary to the insistence of hyper-protectionist administration officials like Peter Navarro, the tariffs do not appear designed to act as a long-term policy measure to form a mercantilist economy but as a mechanism to encourage a restructured playing field. In the press conference, the president highlighted the appeal of a system that utilizes tariffs instead of income tax to gather additional tax revenue. Still, it appeared as a very secondary point to his primary insistence that America is getting “ripped off” on global trade.
President Trump repeatedly provided an off-ramp to countries—both friends and adversaries—that shield their economies from American business and made it clear that he would not remain hyper-committed to the idea of having to perfectly remedy an unbalanced trade deficit.
The infamous trade deficits/tariffs chart that the president unveiled on Liberation Day can now best be understood as the president’s first also in an attempt to reset the geopolitical chessboard on trade, but not as some attempt to radically transform it.
While resulting trade deals may allow America to bolster its manufacturing prowess, the president's Monday remarks seem to have quashed the notion that the United States will radically transform its economy into a siloed anti-market economy.
As proven by his business and political career, President Trump is a dealmaker and a pragmatist, not an ideologue. His trade gambit is certainly ambitious, and the merits of even engaging in such a ploy are definitely worthy of critique. But contrary to the opinion of various pro and anti-Trump pundits and commentators, it does not appear to be some grand scheme to overturn the entire global order.
I am a big Trump supporter although he does nothing the way I would probably do it. I think his way is better in our current national and world situation.
I remember distinctly when NAFTA was implemented. I remember being completely unsure whether it was good or bad even though I listened carefully and considered both sides of the argument.
I think by the numbers and from my personal observation that NAFTA and the so called free trade we have engaged in for decades, that winners and losers are fairly clear now. Workers and small business have lost. Big business has won. The middle of the country has lost. The coasts have won. Urban areas have won (mostly) and rural areas have lost (mostly).
I think in net terms, America has lost. Trump is smashing the status quo IMO to attempt to fix this problem. It is painful. I am watching my investments take a beating. Hopefully short term. I think it is necessary however because America has been hollowed out. The excessive trade deficits DO matter. That was not always clear to me. They must be brought under control by exporting more and/or importing less. Probably preferable to export more but we will see.
I hope America will have the patience to wait this out to fruition and reap what I think will be the benefits.
I'm all for the elimination of the income tax, with a replacement of import duties. I would have preferred the Fair Tax, but that's an argument for another day.
My biggest question is: Why wasn't this talked up more in the Liberation Day speech? I know it was mentioned in multiple presentations by President Trump, but would it be a good idea to promote the two ideas together?