Since his return to the White House, US President Donald Trump has upended Washington’s trade policy. Trump forced Colombia to accept deported migrants by threatening a 25 percent tariff on all Colombian goods. He also announced a 25 percent additional tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico — which he later paused for 30 days following talks with Canadian and Mexican leaders — and a 10 percent additional tariff on imports from China.
Trump has said that he would raise tariffs on goods from the EU.
On Friday, at a meeting with visiting Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Trump said he was considering announcing reciprocal tariffs on many countries this week.
While Trump did not specify which countries would be targeted nor provide any details on reciprocal tariffs, his latest pronouncements suggest a shift from his campaign promise of imposing universal tariffs of 10 to 20 percent on all imports into the US.
It would also be a major escalation of his trade disputes with US trade partners if it triggers an across-the-board increase in retaliatory tariffs.
Thus far, Trump has cited concerns over illegal immigration, drug trafficking and trade deficits for his tariff threats, but his main purpose is to restore the US manufacturing industry and curb China’s technology development. It might also be a political tactic leveraging tariffs to make up for the shortfall in tax revenue due to his plans to cut domestic taxes.
The reciprocal tariffs idea is worth noting. Trump during his presidential campaign said that he would work with the US Congress to pass the US Reciprocal Trade Act, which would give him the authority to increase tariffs on imported goods to match the tariffs that a foreign country imposes on similar US goods.
Trump’s real target appears to be countries with significant trade surpluses with the US, as well as those that have particularly high tariff differentials with it. In either case, Taipei is likely to be one of Washington’s next targets.
US Department of Commerce data showed that the US trade deficit last year increased 17 percent to a record US$918 billion. China topped the list, with a trade surplus of US$361.03 billion, followed by Mexico with a record trade surplus of US$172 billion. Other countries that had significant trade surpluses with the US last year include Vietnam, Ireland, Germany, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Canada and Thailand.
Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro said that the targets for reciprocal tariffs are China and India, followed by the EU, Thailand, Taiwan and Vietnam, with Japan and Malaysia being in the third tier of targets.
As Japan would soon begin importing a record amount of US liquefied natural gas to reduce the US trade deficit with Japan and address the reciprocal tariff threat, per the meeting between Ishiba and Trump, Taiwan could follow Tokyo’s example by importing more US energy. This could also help accelerate domestic energy transformation.
In the near term, engaging in intensive contacts with Trump administration officials and aligning with Trump’s “America First” agenda would give Taiwan an edge over its competitors. Longer term, boosting purchases of US weapons and agricultural products, and collaborating with the US in fields such as drones, semiconductors and artificial intelligence could demonstrate the nation’s determination to maintain a firm relationship with Washington.
It is undeniable that reciprocal tariffs would intensify trade tensions and weaken global trade and economic growth. They are bound to affect export-reliant Taiwan, but they also provide the country with an opportunity to re-examine its economic relations with the US, diversify its export markets and strengthen economic cooperation with Japan, South Korea, India, Southeast Asia and Europe to enhance supply chain resilience.
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
RSS