The Trump administration is up against a major deadline this Wednesday. They are long overdue to get solid trade accords done and dusted with Japan, Malaysia, and the Philippines. The administration’s efforts are part of President Donald Trump’s “America First” campaign, which emphasizes prioritizing American interests and securing favorable trade agreements. Time is running out to deliver on these pledges. As we noted last week, the administration is under intense pressure to demonstrate real results.
The September 30th deadline for final trade offers has added much urgency to the trade-seeking administration’s negotiations. In the meantime, Trump’s team wants to wring some kind of announceable trade concession from another large trading partner—preferably before the self-imposed deadline. The administration faces many challenges. Ongoing legal challenges continue to threaten the very tariffs that form the foundation of its trade strategy.
At the moment, a U.S. federal appeals court is considering whether to dismiss a suit holding Trump’s tariffs unconstitutional. This legal proceeding has taken the tariffs off what many analysts have called “litigation life support.” The administration has received a brief stay for the tariffs while awaiting the court’s decision, which could have far-reaching implications for Trump’s trade policies.
The United Kingdom has become the only country to really get anywhere on a trade agreement with the U.S. Given the cacophony of negotiations their progress has been especially conspicuous. This agreement is mostly symbolism, as there are very few actual specifics laid out about trade. This indicates serious commitment to continue negotiating in good faith. To many it appears like an attempt to placate President Trump as he seeks real wins on his trade agenda.
The opening talks with the U.K. represent one development to occur under increased criticism of Trump’s trade practices. A recent U.S. International Trade Court’s preliminary determinations suggest that Trump illegally misapplied the IEEPA. This variously means he unconstitutionally imposed tariffs. If these findings are upheld, they would greatly limit Trump’s authority to issue tariffs in the future. This would blow all of his existing trade strategy to smithereens.
These are very high stakes indeed, not just for the Trump administration but the current global market. As we’ve seen in recent months, Trump’s tariffs have had a market-shattering effect across the globe, wreaking havoc on multiple industries and economies. No matter how it plays out, the administration will have a hard time avoiding additional trade agreements. Legal obstacles add a new twist to an already heated standoff.
As Wednesday draws near, it is still unclear whether the Trump administration will be able to bring forth any significant trade agreements. The urgency of the situation reflects both internal and external pressures that could shape the future of U.S. trade policy. The outcome of this week’s negotiations and legal battles could determine the trajectory of Trump’s trade agenda and its implications for American workers and industries.