Tariffs are taxes placed on imported goods by a government or a supranational union. Occasionally, tariffs can be applied to exports as well. They generate government revenue and serve as a trade regulation tool, often to shield domestic industries.
Four main categories of tariffs are:
Ad valorem tariffs: These are calculated as a percentage of the good’s value. For instance, a 20% tax might be placed on $100 of goods.
Specific tariffs: These are fixed fees based on the quantity of goods. For example, there might be a tariff of $5 per imported kilogram of sugar.
Compound tariffs: These combine a specific duty and an ad valorem duty applied to the same imported goods. Both tariffs are calculated together to determine the total tax. For example, a country might place a tariff on imported wine at $5 per liter plus 10% of the wine’s value.
Mixed tariffs: Mixed tariffs apply either a specific duty or an ad valorem duty, based on predefined conditions. For instance, for imported trucks, a country might charge either $5,000 per vehicle or 15% of the car’s value, whichever is greater.
The objective of such policy is to influence international trade flows, protect domestic industries, and respond to unfair practices by foreign countries. When a tariff is applied to an imported good, it raises its cost, making domestically produced alternatives more lucrative for customers regarding price.
In the US, the Trump administration uses reciprocal tariffs as a key instrument in influencing the trade policies of other countries. Reciprocal tariffs are trade duties a country imposes in retaliation to tariffs or barriers set by another country. This policy seeks to correct trade imbalances and safeguard domestic industries.
Tariffs are generally collected by the customs departments of a country at ports of entry based on the declared value and classification of goods.
Did you know? Some countries use tariff-rate quotas, allowing a set quantity of a product to be imported at a lower tariff. Once the quota is exceeded, a higher tariff kicks in. This system balances domestic protection with access to global markets, especially in sectors like agriculture and textiles.
Trump administration’s reciprocal tariff policy
US President Donald Trump signed an executive order on April 2, 2025, a day he called Liberation Day, citing his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The order placed a minimum 10% tariff on all US imports effective April 5, 2025. Reciprocal tariffs went into effect on April 9, 2025.
Trump stated that the US would apply reciprocal tariffs at roughly half the rate imposed by other countries. For instance, the US imposed a 34% tariff in response to China’s 67%. A 25% tariff on all automobile imports was also announced.
The Trump administration’s reciprocal tariff policy is rooted in the belief that the US faced long-standing trade imbalances and unfair treatment by global trading partners. To address this, his administration pushed for what it called reciprocal tariffs, aiming at setting a tariff structure that matched or at least was close to tariffs that foreign nations imposed on American exports.
Under this approach, the administration used tariff policies to pressure countries to lower their trade barriers or renegotiate trade deals. The policy drew support from domestic manufacturers and labor groups for attempting to rebalance trade and support the US industry. But it also sparked criticism from economists and international allies who viewed it as protectionist and destabilizing the prevalent economic system in the world.
The reciprocal tariffs policy has reshaped US trade relations and marked a departure from decades of multilateral, open global trade policy.
Did you know? Tariffs can reshape supply chains. To avoid high import taxes, companies often relocate manufacturing to countries with favorable trade agreements. This shift doesn’t always benefit consumers, as savings are not always passed down, and logistics become more complex.
The US–China tariff war: A defining economic conflict
The US–China tariff war, which began in 2018 under the first Trump administration, marked a significant shift in global economic relations. The conflict between the world’s two largest economies had broad implications for global supply chains, inflation and geopolitical dynamics.
The trade conflict between the US and China wasn’t just a bilateral spat. It signaled a structural rethinking of trade policy in a multipolar world. The trade war began after the US imposed sweeping tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, citing unfair trade practices, intellectual property theft and forced technology transfers by China.
Over time, the US levied tariffs on more than $360 billion worth of Chinese goods. China retaliated with tariffs on $110 billion of US exports, targeting key sectors like agriculture and manufacturing.
The conflict disrupted major supply chains and raised costs for American businesses and consumers. American farmers were hit hard by retaliatory Chinese tariffs on soybeans, leading the US government to provide billions in subsidies to offset losses.
While the Phase One Agreement in 2020 eased tensions and required China to increase purchases of US goods and enforce intellectual property protections, many tariffs remained in place. The Biden administration retained most of the economic measures imposed by the first Trump administration, signaling bipartisan concern over China’s trade practices.
As of April 10, 2025, Trump had imposed 125% tariffs on China, while for 75 countries, he had paused the imposition of tariffs for 90 days.
Compared to disputes with allies like the European Union or Canada, the stakes are higher in the US–China conflict, and the consequences are more far-reaching.
Here are the responses of various governments to Trump’s tariffs:
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney implemented a 25% tariff on US-made cars and trucks.
China will impose a 34% tariff on all US imports, effective April 10.
The French prime minister described the tariffs as an economic catastrophe.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni criticized the tariffs as wrong.
European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen pledged a unified response and prepared countermeasures.
Taiwan’s government denounced the tariffs as unreasonable.
How do tariffs work?
When a tariff is applied — for example, a 30% tax on imported steel — it raises the price of that good for importers. They, in turn, pass these added costs to downstream businesses, which further transfer these costs to consumers.
For importers, tariffs mean higher purchase costs. If a US company imports machinery from abroad and faces a tariff, its total cost increases. This possibly reduces its profit margins or forces it to search for alternatives. Exporters in other countries may suffer if US buyers reduce orders due to higher prices, hurting their competitiveness.
Domestic producers may benefit initially from a high tariff regime. Tariffs can shield them from cheaper foreign competition, allowing them to increase sales and potentially make profits. But if their operations rely on imported components subject to tariffs, their input costs may rise, offsetting gains.
Consumers often bear the brunt. Tariffs can lead to price hikes on everyday goods — from electronics to apparel. In the long term, high tariffs contribute to inflation and reduce purchasing power.
Tariffs also disrupt global supply chains. Many products are assembled using components from multiple countries. High tariffs on one component can cause delays, prompt redesigns, or force companies to relocate manufacturing, increasing complexity and costs.
Overall, while tariffs aim to protect domestic industries, their impact is felt across the economy through altering prices, trade flows and business strategies. One way or another, tariffs influence everyone — from factory owners to workers and everyday shoppers.
Trump excluded various tech products, such as smartphones, chips, computers and certain electronics, from reciprocal tariffs, providing the tech sector with crucial relief from tariff pressure. This step of Trump eased pressure on tech stocks.
Trump’s tariff announcement on April 2 triggered a sharp sell-off in both equities and Bitcoin (BTC), with BTC plunging 10.5% in a week. Once seen as a non-correlated asset, Bitcoin now trades in sync with tech stocks during macro shocks. According to analysts, institutional investors increasingly treat BTC as a risk-on asset closely tied to policy shifts. While some view Bitcoin as digital gold, recent behavior shows it reacting more like Nasdaq stocks — falling during global uncertainty and rallying on positive sentiment.
Did you know? Tariff exemptions can be highly strategic. Governments may exclude specific industries or companies, allowing them to import goods tariff-free while competitors pay more. This creates an uneven playing field and can spark domestic controversy.
Why do tariffs matter for global markets?
Tariffs are a robust tool in the hands of governments to shape a nation’s economic and trade strategy. They are not merely taxes on imports but a tool that influences domestic production, consumer behavior and global trade relationships.
For the US, tariffs have historically been used to assert economic power on the global stage, protect emerging industries, and respond to unfair trade practices.
When countries with large economies are involved, tariff decisions can impact global supply chains, shift manufacturing hubs, and alter the price of goods worldwide. Even for the smaller countries, in an interconnected world, tariffs matter because their impact goes far beyond national borders.
Domestically, tariffs could boost local industries by making foreign goods more expensive. This can create jobs and support economic resilience in the short term.
Governments getting larger revenue via tariffs will enable them to reduce direct taxes as Trump proposed. But they can also raise prices for consumers, hurt exporters, and trigger retaliation from trade partners.
As geopolitical tensions rise and nations reevaluate their economic dependencies, tariffs have reemerged as a central element of US trade policy.
Whether used defensively or offensively, they shape the balance between protectionism and global engagement. This makes tariffs a matter not just of economics, but of national strategy and global influence.
Who sets tariff policy in the US?
In the US, tariff policy is shaped by a combination of legislative authority, executive power and administrative enforcement. Various agencies also help in the execution of tariff policy.
Congress holds the constitutional authority to regulate trade and impose tariffs. Over time, Congress has given the president significant power to change tariffs for national security, economic threats or trade violations.
The Office of the US Trade Representative plays a central role in formulating and negotiating US trade policy. It leads trade talks, manages disputes, and recommends tariff actions, often in coordination with the president and Congress.
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is responsible for enforcing tariffs at ports of entry. CBP collects duties based on the classification and value of imported goods according to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule.
Several major trade laws have shaped tariff policy in the US. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, aimed at protecting US farmers during the Great Depression, led to retaliatory tariffs and worsened global trade.
Later, the Trade Act of 1974 gave the president tools like Section 301, which was used extensively during the US–China trade war to impose retaliatory tariffs on unfair foreign practices.
Together, these actors and laws form the foundation of US tariff policy.
Criticism of Trump’s tariff policy
Criticism of Trump’s tariff policy surfaced following the announcement of reciprocal tariffs. Critics say this move bypasses Congress and sets a dangerous precedent for unchecked executive power in economic matters.
Detractors argue that these tariffs hurt American businesses more than their intended foreign targets. A Vox article argued that low-income people would be hit more by Trump’s tariffs than by the already reeling Wall Street. Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers fears that America may slip into recession due to tariffs, probably costing 2 million jobs nationwide.
Legal challenges have also emerged regarding Trump’s tariff policy. The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), a conservative legal group, has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Simplified, a small business based in Florida that sells planners and sources goods from China. The lawsuit claims that the president overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) when imposing tariffs in a non-emergency trade context.
Small and mid-sized businesses, many of which rely on global supply chains, will have to deal with rising import costs due to tariffs. This may lead to inflation and reduced competitiveness of such businesses.
While the tariffs might hit China financially in the short term, the action could result in higher prices for US consumers and disrupt operations for American firms if the tariff policy continues for a long time.
Sir Keir Starmer will on Monday join world leaders at a historic summit in Egypt to witness the signing of the Gaza peace plan to end two years of conflict, bloodshed and suffering, that has cost tens of thousands of lives and turned Gaza into a wasteland.
Travelling over to Egypt, flanked by his national security advisor Jonathan Powell, the prime minister told me it was a “massive moment” and one that is genuinely historic.
In the flurry of the following 48 hours, Mr Starmer and another twenty or so leaders were invited to Egypt to bear witness to the signing of this deal, with many of them deserving some credit for the effort they made to bring this deal around, not least the leaders of Qatar, Egypt and Turkey, who pressed Hamas to sign up to this deal.
On Monday, the remaining 20 living hostages are finally set to be released, along with the bodies of another 28 who were either killed or died in captivity, and aid is due to flow back into a starving Gaza.
Some 1,200 Israelis were killed on 7 October 2023, with another 250 taken hostage. In the subsequent war, most of Gaza’s two million population has been displaced. More than 67,000 Gazans have been killed, according to Palestinian health officials
Then, the signing ceremony is due to take place on Monday afternoon in Sharm el-Sheikh. It will be a momentous moment after a long and bloody war.
More on Israel-hamas War
Related Topics:
But it is only just the beginning of a long process to rebuild Gaza and try to secure a lasting peace in the region.
The immediate focus for the UK and other nations will be to get aid into Gaza with the UK committing £20m on Monday for water, sanitation and hygiene services for Gazans.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:25
Humanitarian aid rolls into Gaza
But the bigger focus for the UK and other European allies is what happens after the hostages are released and Israel withdraws its troops.
Because what happens next is a much bigger and more complicated task: rebuilding Gaza; turning it into a terrorist-free zone; governing Gaza – the current plan is for a temporary apolitical committee; creating an international stabilisation force and all the tensions that could bring about – which troops each side would allow in; a commitment for Israel not to occupy or annex Gaza, even as Netanyahu makes plain his opposition to that plan.
The scale of the challenge is matched by the scale of devastation caused by this brutal war.
The prime minister will tomorrow set out his ambition for the UK to play a leading role in the next phase of the peace plan.
Back home the UK is hosting a three-day conference on Gaza’s recovery and reconstruction.
Last week, France hosted European diplomats and key figures from Middle Eastern countries, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Qatar and later this week, the German chancellor is hoping to organise a conference on the reconstruction of Gaza with the Egyptians.
But in reality, European leaders know the key to phase two remains the key to phase one: and that’s Donald Trump.
As one UK figure put it to me over the weekend: “There is lots of praise, rightly, for the US president, who got this over the line, but the big challenge for us post-war is implementing the plan. Clearly, Arab partners are concerned the US will lose focus”.
The prime minister knows this and has made a point, at every point, to praise Mr Trump.
Image: Bridget Phillipson and Mike Huckabee. Pics: Sky/AP
His cabinet minister Bridget Phillipson learned that diplomatic lesson the hard way on Sunday when she was publicly lambasted by the US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee for suggesting to my colleague Trevor Phillips that the UK “had played a key role behind the scenes” and failed to mention Mr Trump by name.
“I assure you she is delusional,” tweeted Governor Huckabee. “She can thank @realDonaldTrump anytime just to set the record straight”.
On Monday, leaders will rightly be praising Mr Trump for securing the breakthrough to stop the fighting and get the remaining hostages home.
Image: People hug next in Hostages Square. Pic: Reuters
But this is only the beginning of a very long journey ahead to push through the rest of the 19-point plan and stop the region from falling back into conflict.
Britain has, I am told, been playing a role behind the scenes. The PM’s national security adviser Mr Powell was in Egypt last week and has been in daily touch with his US counterpart Steve Witkoff, according to government sources. Next week the King of Jordan will come to the UK.
Part of the UK’s task will be to get more involved, with the government and European partners keen to get further European representation on Trump’s temporary governance committee for Gaza, which Tony Blair (who was not recommended or endorsed by the UK) is on and Mr Trump will chair.
The committee will include other heads of states and members, including qualified Palestinians and international experts.
As for the former prime minister’s involvement, there hasn’t been an overt ringing endorsement from the UK government.
It’s helpful to have Mr Blair at the table because he can communicate back to the current government, but equally, as one diplomatic source put it to me: “While a lot of people in the Middle East acknowledge his experience, expertise and contact book, they don’t like him and we need – sooner rather than later – other names included that Gulf partners can get behind.”
On Monday it will be the US, Egypt, Qatar and Turkey that sign off on the peace plan they directly negotiated, as other Middle Eastern and European leaders, who have flown into Sharm el-Sheikh to bear witness, look on.
But in the coming days and weeks, there will need to be a big international effort, led by Mr Trump, not just to secure the peace, but to keep it.
The US ambassador to Israel has called cabinet minister Bridget Phillipson “delusional” after she told Sky News the UK played a key role in the Gaza peace deal.
The education secretary told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that Sir Keir Starmer’s presence at a signing ceremony for the ceasefire deal in Egypt on Monday “demonstrates the key role that we have played”.
She did not say exactly what the UK’s role in the ceasefire, largely attributed to Donald Trump, is or was.
But she added: “We have played a key role behind the scenes in shaping this.
“It’s right that we do so because it’s in all of our interest, including our own national interest, that we move to a lasting peace in the region.
“These are complex matters of diplomacy that we are involved in. But we do welcome and recognise the critical role that the American government played in moving us to this point.”
More on Bridget Phillipson
Related Topics:
However, the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, reposted the Sky News clip of Ms Phillipson’s comments and said: “I assure you she’s delusional.
“She can thank Donald Trump anytime just to set the record straight.”
Mr Huckabee was part of the negotiating team for the peace deal, with Mr Trump calling the former Arkansas governor “AMAZING” as he said he “worked so hard, and did so much, to bring about peace in the Middle East”.
In August, Mr Huckabee said the UK and other European nations who said they would declare a Palestinian state were “having the counterproductive effect that they probably think that they want”.
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
Israel’s deputy foreign affairs minister, Sharren Haskell, told Sky News the UK played “the opposite” of a key role in the peace deal after the Palestinian state declaration, which eventually happened in September.
She accused the PM’s initial threat “at a very sensitive time” in July of having “pushed Hamas to embolden their position and to refuse a ceasefire two months ago”.
“I think that right now, the quiet that was given during the negotiation, and to President Trump, had probably played a bigger role than what the government had done two months ago,” she said.
“The message that the UK government has sent Hamas was the message that: the longer they continue this war, they will be rewarded.
“I mean, you must understand that when a terrorist organisation is thanking you. You are on the wrong side of history.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:59
Final preparations for hostages in Israeli hospital
Ms Phillipson stood by the decision to declare a Palestinian state, saying it was “the right thing to do”.
Husam Zomlot, the Palestinian ambassador to the UK, told Sky News it was a “moment of leadership” for the UK to declare a Palestinian state, and a “responsibility to begin to correct a century of the gravest historic injustices committed against our people”.
He added: “That moment three weeks ago, when the UK did recognise, is a moment when we can say that the wheels of history are turning in a different direction.”
No plans for British troops on the ground
The education secretary also told Sky News the government has “no plans” to put British troops into Israel or Gaza as part of a stabilisation force after the ceasefire.
The US military will help establish a multinational force in Israel, known as a civil-military coordination centre, which is likely to include troops from Egypt, Qatar, Turkey and the UAE.
Image: Tens of thousands of Palestinians have walked back to Khan Younis in southern Gaza. Pic: AP
On Friday, US officials said up to 200 US troops already based in the Middle East will be moved to Israel to help monitor the ceasefire in Gaza.
The day before, President Trump announced Israel and Hamas had “signed off on the first phase” of a peace plan he unveiled last week.
Image: Pic: Reuters
Aid trucks have been gathering in Egypt to cross into Gaza after months of warnings by aid groups of famine in parts of the territory.
In Israel, the remaining hostages are due to be returned from Gaza by Hamas on Monday under the first phase of the peace plan. Twenty are believed to still be alive, 26 have been declared dead, while the fate of two is unknown.
The ceasefire agreement has been made two years after Hamas stormed Israel on 7 October 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages.
Israel’s military offensive has killed more than 67,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, which the UN deems reliable.