| At 9.37am Eastern Time, Donald Trump advised his followers with an appetite for speculation: “THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!” Less than four hours later, in what Treasury secretary Scott Bessent magnificently described as “one of the most extraordinary Truth posts of his Presidency,” he announced the rollback of his tariff policy, and the market duly soared. Is it insider trading if your source is the president? Anyway, as the dust settled, traders kept buying. That was claimed as a major victory by Trump: “It’s up almost 2,500 points,” he said. “Nobody’s ever heard of it. It’s got to be a record.” But the reality is that the mood of uncertainty he has created will not easily be dispelled. What does the US tariff regime look like now? With the caveat that this is liable to change at any moment even though everyone in the White House is now asleep, here’s where things now stand: • China’s tariff was raised to 125%, which means – given an existing 25% tariff – that some goods are now subject to an additional 150% rate. That is massively up on the 34% Trump announced last week. With a new 84% tariff in response yesterday, Trump again said that Beijing has been “ripping off the USA”. • Every other country which saw its tariff raised above the baseline 10% in Trump’s “liberation day” announcement has seen the rate dialled back to that 10%. So no change for the UK; a very significant change for Vietnam (46%), India (26%), the European Union (20%), and the Falkland Islands (41%), whose 3,600 residents can now resume selling Americans frozen fish. Trump initially claimed that this was because more than 75 countries, of 190 affected, had sought to negotiate a deal without retaliating. The higher tariffs are paused for 90 days, and could be reimposed or increased again. • There was some confusion over what would happen to Mexico and Canada, whose tariffs were not included in the announcement last week because they had already been set as high as 25% on a large proportion of their exports. Scott Bessent said the 10% rate would apply to them too; the White House later contradicted him and said that their tariffs would remain unchanged. Where does this leave China? In truth, the new announcement doesn’t change much. With tariffs that high, Trump might as well set them to a gazillion per cent and demand every import comes with a free Fabergé egg: the additional rate will make a minimal difference, because hardly anyone will be exporting anything from China to the US. The World Trade Organization forecast yesterday that trade between the two countries could drop by 80%, or $466bn a year. So is the goal to tank the Chinese economy, or to force China to negotiate? That was unclear yesterday. Bessent praised Trump for “goading China into a bad position” so that they “showed themselves to the world to be the bad actor”. That would seem to imply the tank strategy. But Trump himself took a much sunnier line later on: he told reporters that president Xi Jinping “is a smart guy and we’ll end up making a very good deal.” It is certainly plausible that the two sides will eventually arrive at some figure that both can present as a victory domestically. But as Amy Hawkins writes in this piece, that is unlikely to be on the basis of a major Chinese retreat. That is partly because Chinese exports to the US are largely consumer goods, badly exposed to eye-watering price increases, while the goods going the other way are commodities whose expense can be at least somewhat absorbed before they reach the consumer market. What about the UK? In one sense, the UK is exactly where it started: because it was already on the lowest 10% rate, nothing has changed. On the other hand, the fact that 10% is now the same rate as almost everyone else erases the comparative advantage that has been presented as a bright side. Speaking to ITV before the latest announcement, Keir Starmer reiterated that “a trade war is in nobody’s interest” but that retaliatory measures remained on the table. He also acknowledged that it was impossible to know if the 10% will ever be removed. In this piece, Rowena Mason reports that Whitehall sources are “increasingly downbeat” about striking a deal to reduce the tariffs. Why did Trump do it? That depends on who you ask. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt implied that the change was part of a long-term strategy, saying that reporters had “clearly missed the art of the deal” and “failed to see what President Trump is doing here”. Bessent claimed similarly that this had been Trump’s “strategy all along”. And Trump advisor Stephen Miller claimed it was “the greatest economic master strategy from an American president in history”. But those confident assertions looked a bit shakier when Trump himself emerged to speak to reporters and said that he was acting in a “flexible” way, and that he reacted because “people … were getting a little bit yippy, a little bit afraid”. He also said that “A lot of times it’s not a negotiation until it is”, so make of that what you will. As for what he does next: that will be based on “instinct”, he said. The economist Mohamed El-Erian suggested that Trump was responding above all to a major sell-off in US government debt, a dangerous sign of investor scepticism of the US since its bonds are generally viewed as a safe harbour in an economic storm. The New York Times reports that Bessent and other advisors emphasised the issue in a meeting with Trump yesterday morning. But if you concluded that Trump may just as easily have made a capricious choice based on no serious rationale at all, you wouldn’t sound like an idiot. Where does this leave the markets – and the wider global economic outlook? In the context of the last week, this was a euphoric day for traders. The S&P 500 rose 9.5%, its biggest single-day climb since 2008; 494 of the 500 stocks covered ended higher than they began. One index of the improving mood was Goldman Sachs’ decision to rescind their recession forecast within hours of making it. Overnight, Asian markets have also climbed, and futures – a way to bet on prices ahead of markets opening – were up for European stocks and the FTSE 100. On the other hand, the S&P 500 is still down a significant 11.2% on where it was in February – and 10% universal tariffs are still a really big deal. Bob Elliott, a prominent hedge fund manager, said the market response was “likely far too positive” and noted that when taken alongside the Chinese rate and sector-specific rates elsewhere, the effective overall rate on imports is closer to 20%. That is only down 5% on where it stood before Trump’s announcement, and higher than it has been since the 1930s. The China tariffs alone could lead to a long term reduction in global GDP by nearly 7%, the WTO estimated. And when the dust settles, many companies will still be deeply sceptical that they can count on the kind of stability that tends to promote investment, new hiring, and economic growth. For now, the next questions are whether deals start to be struck, and whether improving share prices are the start of a sustained recovery or merely a “relief rally”. Jake Schurmeier, a portfolio manager at Harbor Capital Advisors, told Bloomberg: “Good news doesn’t eliminate the overarching uncertainty. We [will] likely go higher for a few days, but I think permanent damage has been done.” | 