The United States granted its numerous trade partners 90 days starting April 9 to reach agreements satisfying President Donald Trump’s push for an unprecedented protectionist tariff regime in decades. As of now, 88 days have passed, and Washington has only finalized two agreements, or initial understandings, with the United Kingdom and Vietnam, along with a temporary truce with China.
The deadline expires this Wednesday, and there is little indication that this next milestone in Trump’s trade war will bring anything other than the uncertainty and chaos that have marked previous phases. The Trump administration has now set its sights on a specific date: August 1. In a recent display of confusion, the president stated late Sunday that letters announcing tariffs or agreements reached would begin to be sent out on Monday. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick added that these tariffs would take effect on August 1.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also referenced the August 1 date in a Sunday CNN interview, stating that countries failing to finalize agreements before that date would automatically face the tariffs announced on April 2, a tariff barrage from which Mexico and Canada were exempted.
“This is not a new deadline. What we’re saying is that if they want to hurry and negotiate, great; if they prefer to revert to the previous [April 2 tariffs], that will be their decision,” clarified Bessent, who promised “many announcements in the next 72 hours.”
The August 1 date is not new. Trump referenced it again last Friday when he resumed his offensive by announcing the dispatch of an initial batch of letters to “10 or 12 countries” with decisions made by his administration on what tariffs would apply from that date onward. The Republican did not specify which countries would receive these letters first or the exact rates involved. He did, however, offer a broad range, from “10 to 20%” up to “60 or 70%.”
This time, there is also urgency to reach agreements with key partners such as the European Union, where U.S. tariffs pose a significant challenge to an already intense relationship. Negotiations appear to have progressed more in recent weeks than in the first two months.
It remains unclear what the U.S. president will do once the self-imposed grace period, announced seven days after the unilateral tariffs imposed on April 2, comes to an end. That initial escalation was met with sharp market declines, prompting Trump to reconsider under pressure from both domestic and international actors.
The task assigned by the president to his key economic officials—Treasury Secretary Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer—always seemed daunting. After all, trade agreements are typically long-term processes that can take months or even years. The results obtained so far appear clearly insufficient to meet Trump’s ambitious goal of “fixing trade,” a phrase he frequently uses.
The past week in Washington has been intense not only for EU negotiators but also for discussions with countries like South Korea, whose trade minister, Yeo Han-koo, met with Greer this Saturday, and Thailand, facing the threat of a 36% tariff. Japan has also come under scrutiny after Trump criticized Tokyo’s negotiating stance last week, urged increased U.S. rice imports, and criticized the bilateral trade relationship regarding automobile sales. The Republican also threatened Japan with a tariff letter imposing a rate of “30%, 35%, or whatever we decide.”
The U.S.-EU trade relationship is among the most significant globally. According to 2024 data, goods worth €2.4 billion cross the Atlantic daily in either direction, totaling €870 billion last year, with a U.S. trade deficit nearing €20 billion.
Brussels expressed disappointment over recent developments, as European negotiators indicated to EU diplomatic representatives on Friday. According to sources familiar with the meeting, there was a sense of “disappointment” among those briefed on how the Washington talks unfolded.
On the table is the 17% U.S. offer for agricultural products imported from the EU, as previously reported. That figure would be added to existing tariffs imposed since Trump initiated his global trade offensive: 25% on automobiles and components, 50% on steel and aluminum, and a 10% general tariff on a wide range of products, with exceptions benefiting the aerospace and spirits sectors.
If these figures hold, the relationship could be described as “asymmetric,” a euphemism gaining traction in Brussels to avoid the more humiliating term “unbalanced.” There is also urgency among EU member states in Brussels, all seeking a swift agreement to end the uncertainty gripping the global economy.
That a deal may come quickly means, as acknowledged by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen during a visit to Denmark on Thursday, that it would likely be incomplete. She suggested that an initial framework could be reached now, with further negotiations to finalize details later.
From the European perspective, it remains unclear what price the 27 member states are willing to pay for an agreement. Diplomatic sources suggest that Germany, Belgium, and Hungary—countries with strong automotive manufacturing interests—might accept a more lopsided deal to avoid further escalation harming trade.
Others, like Spain, have simply stated they will support the Commission. However, the 17% agricultural tariff would hit hardest those countries most reliant on such exports, including Spain, France, Italy, and the Netherlands.
For many, Vietnam’s case offers a model: by agreeing not to impose tariffs on U.S. imports, Hanoi received a 20% rate on all its products—double the universal rate Trump announced in April, but still less than half the initial 46% threat.