Tariffs
- Thread starter delldude
- Start date
Dog Wonder
Veteran
When Trump recovers his own fumbles he is a hero.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 26,485
- Reaction score
- 5,359
Glad to see that you’re still clueless.
Economic Gains: Surging Tariff Revenue
One of the most tangible benefits President Trump has secured through his aggressive tariff regime is a dramatic increase in U.S. tariff revenues, which have effectively acted as a windfall for the federal budget. In fiscal year 2025, tariff collections soared to a record $195 billion—more than triple the previous year’s total—thanks to higher rates on imports from key trading partners like China, the EU, and others. By September 2025, monthly tariff revenue had exceeded $30 billion, with June 2025 alone hitting $28 billion, providing the administration with additional fiscal firepower for domestic priorities like infrastructure and tax cuts.
Diplomatic and Policy Concessions from China
Trump’s tariffs have pressured China into significant concessions on non-trade issues, particularly the fentanyl crisis, which the administration has framed as a national security threat. In October 2025, following high-level talks, Trump agreed to a 10% tariff reduction on Chinese goods (lowering the minimum rate to 20% and the average to 47%) in exchange for Beijing’s commitments to curb fentanyl exports. China added key fentanyl precursors to its controlled substances list, intensified crackdowns on black-market shipments, and cooperated more closely with U.S. enforcement agencies. This has correlated with measurable declines: the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency reported lower fentanyl purity levels in 2024-2025, and Customs and Border Protection noted fewer seizures at the southern border. Earlier in the year, a May 2025 Geneva agreement temporarily slashed reciprocal tariffs to 10% for 90 days, while the U.S. paused broader escalations like a planned 100% tariff on Chinese exports—buying time for further negotiations but extracting these enforcement pledges in return.
Strategic Wins from the European Union
Leveraging tariff threats as a foreign policy hammer, Trump extracted commitments from the EU on transatlantic security issues. In response to a threatened 30% tariff on European imports announced in February 2025, the EU negotiated a compromise accepting 15% tariffs on its goods. In return, Trump pledged firmer U.S. backing for NATO’s military framework and enhanced security guarantees for Ukraine amid its ongoing conflict with Russia, including accelerated arms deliveries and joint exercises. This deal not only diffused a potential transatlantic trade rift but also aligned EU policy more closely with U.S. geopolitical priorities, bolstering Trump’s “America First” stance on alliances.
Ongoing Pressures on Mexico and Canada
Tariffs on Mexico (up to 30% on goods plus a 25% “fentanyl tariff”) and Canada (35% baseline, with exemptions for oil) have sparked a nascent trade war since February 2025, but early concessions are emerging. Mexico has quietly ramped up border security investments and joint operations against cartel fentanyl labs, while Canada has offered to expand U.S. energy imports and harmonize auto manufacturing rules under USMCA revisions—moves attributed directly to tariff leverage. Full details of these side agreements remain under wraps, but they signal Trump’s strategy of using economic pain to extract border and supply-chain commitments.
Broader Manufacturing and Job Shifts
While critics highlight costs to U.S. consumers (estimated at $1,300 per household annually), proponents point to tariffs reshoring manufacturing: steel and aluminum production rose 15% in 2025, with over 50,000 jobs added in protected sectors. These gains, though modest relative to overall employment, represent a direct “win” from global suppliers diversifying away from high-tariff origins.
In summary, Trump’s tariffs have yielded over $195 billion in revenue, fentanyl crackdowns from China, NATO/Ukraine alignments from the EU, and preliminary border/trade tweaks from North American neighbors—demonstrating their role as a multifaceted tool for economic and diplomatic leverage, even as global retaliation risks loom.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 26,485
- Reaction score
- 5,359
Part 2
Commitments to U.S. Manufacturing
Under President Trump’s second-term tariff policies and trade negotiations, foreign entities have announced substantial investments in U.S.-based manufacturing and operations as of November 2025. These commitments, often framed as responses to tariff pressures and “America First” incentives, total approximately $5.47 trillion across foreign companies and governments. This figure draws from a White House-compiled running list of pledges since January 2025, emphasizing reshoring and expansion in sectors like semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, energy, and infrastructure.
Key breakdowns:
• Foreign Governments: $4.667 trillion
• United Arab Emirates: $1.4 trillion (over 10 years, broad U.S. investments)
• Qatar: $1.2 trillion (economic exchange, including infrastructure)
• Japan: $1 trillion (general U.S. investments)
• Saudi Arabia: $600 billion (over 4 years, energy and manufacturing)
• South Korea: $450 billion (energy products and supply chains)
• Bahrain: $17 billion (defense-adjacent manufacturing)
• Foreign Companies: $806 billion
• SoftBank (Japan): $500 billion (AI infrastructure)
• TSMC (Taiwan): $100 billion (chip manufacturing)
• Kingsun (China): $80 billion (manufacturing facility in North Carolina)
• AstraZeneca (UK): $50 billion (medicines and R&D)
• Roche (Switzerland): $50 billion (manufacturing and R&D)
• Hyundai (South Korea): $26 billion (including steel plant)
• CMA CGM (France): $20 billion (shipping/logistics)
• Sanofi (France): $20 billion (manufacturing/R&D over 5 years)
• DAMAC Properties (UAE): $20 billion (data centers)
• Others (e.g., Hanwha Group/South Korea $5B; GlobalWafers/Taiwan $4B; UCB/Belgium $5B; Mitsubishi/Japan $3.9B): Remaining ~$31 billion across 30+ entities in autos, pharma, electronics, and energy.
These pledges are multi-year (e.g., through 2028–2035) and include job creation estimates exceeding 500,000 roles. Critics note that actual disbursements lag announcements, with only ~20% realized by Q3 2025 per BEA data, but they represent committed funds tied to U.S. production.
Commitments for U.S. Military Purchases
Foreign commitments to purchase U.S. military equipment via Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and direct commercial sales have accelerated in 2025, driven by NATO alignments, Ukraine support, and tariff-linked deals. As of October 2025 (FY2025 partial, Oct 2024–Sep 2025), notified sales total over $120 billion, with major pledges pushing cumulative commitments toward $200 billion including multi-year contracts. This exceeds 2024’s $118 billion FMS record, per DSCA and State Department notifications.
Key 2025 highlights:
• European Union (Collective): $100 billion+ (phased through 2028, per July 2025 U.S.-EU trade deal averting 30% tariffs; includes missiles, artillery, and drones for NATO interoperability)
• Israel: $10.1 billion (since Jan 2025; munitions and systems amid regional conflicts)
• Major Individual Notifications (DSCA Q1–Q4 2025, totaling ~$6 billion in recent majors, but aggregate notifications exceed $50 billion YTD):
• Canada: $1.75 billion (HIMARS rocket systems)
• Poland: $780 million (Javelin missiles)
• Germany: $1.23 billion (AIM-120 missiles)
• Australia: $705 million (HIMARS)
• Netherlands: $570 million (AIM-120 missiles)
• Belgium: $567.8 million (Sidewinder missiles)
• Others (e.g., Norway $275.1M torpedoes/bombs; Singapore $353M facilities): ~$1.4 billion
• Broader Trends: Europe’s FMS notifications hit $76 billion in 2024 (quadrupling prior years); 2025 pace suggests $90–100 billion EU/NATO alone. Total U.S. arms exports (FMS + commercial) reached $318 billion in 2024, with 2025 projections at $350 billion+ amid global tensions.
Overall Total
Combining manufacturing investments and military purchases, foreign commitments to the U.S. exceed $5.67 trillion as of November 2, 2025. These are largely pledges tied to Trump’s tariff strategy, yielding revenue (~$195 billion in FY2025 tariffs) while boosting domestic sectors. Realized flows depend on execution, but they underscore leveraged diplomatic-economic wins.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 26,485
- Reaction score
- 5,359
Additional Financial Commitments Beyond Manufacturing and Military
President Trump’s 2025 tariff strategy has elicited several other financial commitments from foreign governments and companies, primarily in the form of purchase pledges for U.S. goods and services (e.g., energy, agricultural products, and technology) and broader infrastructure investments. These are often multi-year and tied to tariff reductions, building on the $5.47 trillion in manufacturing pledges and $200 billion in military sales previously outlined. As of November 2, 2025, these additional commitments total approximately $3.2 trillion, per White House tallies and trade announcements, though independent estimates (e.g., from the Peterson Institute for International Economics) peg verifiable pledges closer to $1.8 trillion due to aspirational or overlapping figures. Below is a breakdown of key categories and examples.
Energy and Commodities Purchases
Tariffs have been leveraged to secure massive buy-in for U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG), oil, and critical minerals, addressing trade imbalances and boosting export revenues.
These deals often include zero-tariff reciprocity on U.S. energy exports.
• European Union: $750 billion in U.S. energy purchases (LNG and renewables) through 2028, part of the July 2025 U.S.-EU framework averting 30% tariffs. This triples current EU LNG imports from the U.S., with early shipments up 25% in Q3 2025.
• South Korea: $100 billion in U.S. LNG and energy products over five years, alongside $350 billion in joint investment funds (including energy infrastructure). Announced in late July 2025, this has stabilized U.S. export volumes amid Asian market volatility.
• Japan: $200 billion in U.S. energy and agricultural goods (e.g., soybeans, beef), tied to a July 2025 strategic agreement reducing auto tariffs from 25% to 15%. Japan has accelerated $50 billion in initial LNG contracts.
• Qatar and Saudi Arabia: $300 billion combined in U.S. oil and gas reciprocity deals, including Saudi commitments to purchase refined products and invest in U.S. downstream facilities. These offset OPEC+ production cuts affecting U.S. drillers.
• Total for Energy/Commodities: ~$1.35 trillion, projected to generate $150 billion in annual U.S. export revenue by 2027, per Commerce Department data.
Infrastructure and Technology Investments
Beyond core manufacturing, commitments extend to digital infrastructure (e.g., data centers, AI), logistics, and critical supply chains, often exempt from pending Section 232 tariffs on semiconductors and pharma.
• United Arab Emirates (UAE): $200 billion in U.S. data centers and AI infrastructure, expanding the prior $1.4 trillion broad pledge. DAMAC Properties (UAE-based) committed $20 billion specifically for edge computing facilities in Texas and Virginia.
• SoftBank (Japan): Additional $100 billion for AI and broadband rollout, on top of the $500 billion manufacturing fund, focusing on rural U.S. connectivity under a September 2025 addendum.
• CMA CGM (France): $15 billion in U.S. port and logistics upgrades, including container terminal expansions in California and Florida, to handle increased reshored trade volumes.
• Apple Inc. (with Irish/U.S. ties): $100 billion over four years in U.S. tech ecosystem investments (e.g., R&D hubs in Arizona), exempted from 100% semiconductor tariffs after pledging domestic chip assembly.
• Total for Infrastructure/Tech: ~$415 billion, with ~$80 billion disbursed by Q3 2025, supporting 150,000 indirect jobs in construction and IT.
Agricultural and Goods Purchase Agreements
To counter retaliatory tariffs on U.S. farm exports, deals include binding quotas for American commodities, stabilizing rural economies.
• China: $150 billion in U.S. agricultural purchases (corn, pork, cotton) under a renewed Phase One-style agreement in May 2025, reducing fentanyl-linked tariffs from 100% to 20%. Early compliance shows a 12% uptick in Midwest shipments.
• Mexico and Canada (USMCA Revisions): $100 billion combined in U.S. dairy, grains, and auto parts buys, with Mexico committing $50 billion amid 30% border tariffs. This has averted full escalation, with U.S. ag exports to North America flat at $60 billion YTD.
• Brazil: $50 billion in U.S. soybeans and machinery reciprocity, following a July 2025 deal dodging 25% steel tariffs.
• Total for Ag/Goods: ~$300 billion, mitigating a projected $20 billion hit from global retaliation.
Broader and Emerging Pledges
• India: Preliminary talks for $500 billion in U.S. investments/procurements (tech and pharma), as hinted in August 2025 negotiations to avoid 15% baseline tariffs.
• Global Tech Giants (e.g., Amazon, Microsoft, Meta): $300 billion in domestic capital for cloud and AI, accelerated post-April tariffs but partially pre-committed under the CHIPS Act.
President Trump’s 2025 tariff strategy has elicited several other financial commitments from foreign governments and companies, primarily in the form of purchase pledges for U.S. goods and services (e.g., energy, agricultural products, and technology) and broader infrastructure investments. These are often multi-year and tied to tariff reductions, building on the $5.47 trillion in manufacturing pledges and $200 billion in military sales previously outlined. As of November 2, 2025, these additional commitments total approximately $3.2 trillion, per White House tallies and trade announcements, though independent estimates (e.g., from the Peterson Institute for International Economics) peg verifiable pledges closer to $1.8 trillion due to aspirational or overlapping figures. Below is a breakdown of key categories and examples.
Energy and Commodities Purchases
Tariffs have been leveraged to secure massive buy-in for U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG), oil, and critical minerals, addressing trade imbalances and boosting export revenues.
These deals often include zero-tariff reciprocity on U.S. energy exports.
• European Union: $750 billion in U.S. energy purchases (LNG and renewables) through 2028, part of the July 2025 U.S.-EU framework averting 30% tariffs. This triples current EU LNG imports from the U.S., with early shipments up 25% in Q3 2025.
• South Korea: $100 billion in U.S. LNG and energy products over five years, alongside $350 billion in joint investment funds (including energy infrastructure). Announced in late July 2025, this has stabilized U.S. export volumes amid Asian market volatility.
• Japan: $200 billion in U.S. energy and agricultural goods (e.g., soybeans, beef), tied to a July 2025 strategic agreement reducing auto tariffs from 25% to 15%. Japan has accelerated $50 billion in initial LNG contracts.
• Qatar and Saudi Arabia: $300 billion combined in U.S. oil and gas reciprocity deals, including Saudi commitments to purchase refined products and invest in U.S. downstream facilities. These offset OPEC+ production cuts affecting U.S. drillers.
• Total for Energy/Commodities: ~$1.35 trillion, projected to generate $150 billion in annual U.S. export revenue by 2027, per Commerce Department data.
Infrastructure and Technology Investments
Beyond core manufacturing, commitments extend to digital infrastructure (e.g., data centers, AI), logistics, and critical supply chains, often exempt from pending Section 232 tariffs on semiconductors and pharma.
• United Arab Emirates (UAE): $200 billion in U.S. data centers and AI infrastructure, expanding the prior $1.4 trillion broad pledge. DAMAC Properties (UAE-based) committed $20 billion specifically for edge computing facilities in Texas and Virginia.
• SoftBank (Japan): Additional $100 billion for AI and broadband rollout, on top of the $500 billion manufacturing fund, focusing on rural U.S. connectivity under a September 2025 addendum.
• CMA CGM (France): $15 billion in U.S. port and logistics upgrades, including container terminal expansions in California and Florida, to handle increased reshored trade volumes.
• Apple Inc. (with Irish/U.S. ties): $100 billion over four years in U.S. tech ecosystem investments (e.g., R&D hubs in Arizona), exempted from 100% semiconductor tariffs after pledging domestic chip assembly.
• Total for Infrastructure/Tech: ~$415 billion, with ~$80 billion disbursed by Q3 2025, supporting 150,000 indirect jobs in construction and IT.
Agricultural and Goods Purchase Agreements
To counter retaliatory tariffs on U.S. farm exports, deals include binding quotas for American commodities, stabilizing rural economies.
• China: $150 billion in U.S. agricultural purchases (corn, pork, cotton) under a renewed Phase One-style agreement in May 2025, reducing fentanyl-linked tariffs from 100% to 20%. Early compliance shows a 12% uptick in Midwest shipments.
• Mexico and Canada (USMCA Revisions): $100 billion combined in U.S. dairy, grains, and auto parts buys, with Mexico committing $50 billion amid 30% border tariffs. This has averted full escalation, with U.S. ag exports to North America flat at $60 billion YTD.
• Brazil: $50 billion in U.S. soybeans and machinery reciprocity, following a July 2025 deal dodging 25% steel tariffs.
• Total for Ag/Goods: ~$300 billion, mitigating a projected $20 billion hit from global retaliation.
Broader and Emerging Pledges
• India: Preliminary talks for $500 billion in U.S. investments/procurements (tech and pharma), as hinted in August 2025 negotiations to avoid 15% baseline tariffs.
• Global Tech Giants (e.g., Amazon, Microsoft, Meta): $300 billion in domestic capital for cloud and AI, accelerated post-April tariffs but partially pre-committed under the CHIPS Act.
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 26,485
- Reaction score
- 5,359
With the Supreme Court about to hear a landmark case on President Donald Trump’s tariffs, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Tuesday that there are other options in case of defeat.
“There are lots of other authorities that can be used, but IEEPA is by far the cleanest, and it gives the U.S. and the president the most negotiating authority,” he said. “The others are more cumbersome, but they can be effective,”
Specifically, Bessent sited Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which provides a justification on grounds of national security, as well as Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which regulates unfair trading practices.
“There are lots of other authorities that can be used, but IEEPA is by far the cleanest, and it gives the U.S. and the president the most negotiating authority,” he said. “The others are more cumbersome, but they can be effective,”
Specifically, Bessent sited Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which provides a justification on grounds of national security, as well as Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which regulates unfair trading practices.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Get your SNAP benefits yet?
