President Donald Trump said Friday he would be fine with a significant drop in the tariff he imposed on China but left it to his Treasury chief to work out the details.
“80% Tariff on China seems right!” Trump said on his social media platform, adding, “Up to Scott B.,” an apparent reference to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who plans to meet with Chinese officials in Switzerland this weekend.
An 80% tariff would represent a major drop from the crippling 145% tariff currently imposed on most Chinese goods, though economists say even 80% is high enough to severely hamper trade between the U.S. and China.
Later in the day, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt soft-pedaled Trump’s remark, saying the president just “threw out” the number while making it clear that any reduction in the tariff would require a move from the Chinese.
“The president still remains with his position that he is not going to unilaterally bring down tariffs on China,” Leavitt said. “We need to see concessions from them as well.”
Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump said he assumes the tariff rate will be lowered eventually. “You can’t get any higher. It’s at 145, so we know it’s coming down,” Trump said. He then said he expects the talks in Switzerland to be “a very friendly meeting,” adding that the negotiators “look forward to doing it in an elegant way.”
Automakers pan Trump’s UK trade deal: Meanwhile, U.S. automakers issued a negative review of the tariff agreement with the U.K. that Trump announced yesterday. In a statement, the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents Ford, General Motors and Chrysler parent Stellantis, criticized Trump for failing to make North America a priority in trade negotiations, since the region operates as an integrated production zone for the U.S. auto industry.
“We are disappointed that the administration prioritized the UK ahead of our North American partners,” AAPC said. “Under this deal, it will now be cheaper to import a UK vehicle with very little U.S. content than a USMCA compliant vehicle from Mexico or Canada that is half American parts. This hurts American automakers, suppliers, and auto workers.”
Critics also continued to emphasize that the trade framework announced Thursday falls well short of a comprehensive agreement, and in fact creates no enforceable obligations whatsoever. As University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers noted, the text of the “general terms” for a future “prosperity deal” between the countries includes the sentence: “Both the United States and the United Kingdom recognize that this document does not constitute a legally binding agreement.”