The other big “win” for the US was, Trump claims, the opening of its agricultural markets to US exports, particularly the market for rice, which has historically been extremely politically sensitive in Japan.
According to the Office of the US Trade Representative, American farmers will have the same advantage as countries within the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement in selling into the Japanese market.
In theory, US companies will be able to sell more cars to Japan. But the Japanese are unlikely to buy what America has to sell.Credit: Yuriko Nakao
During the Obama administration, America was going to be a party to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, whose members include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.
It was Trump, within days of taking office in his first term in January 2017, who withdrew the US from the TPP. America’s farmers could have had the same trade terms with Japan as those countries eight years ago, if not for Trump.
As for rice, Japan already imports up to 770,000 tonnes a year (the amount is capped to protect its own rice farmers), with the US supplying about 45 per cent of that volume. Yes, the US may be able to sell more and perhaps displace other suppliers, but Japan has reserved the right to decide the additional volume and quality of any extra imports from the US.
Loading
The bottom line for the trade elements of the deal is that it does lift the tariff rate on Japan’s exports to the US – US consumers will pay more for Japanese products – but Japan has negotiated a deal that does only minor damage to its exports and economy in the process while presenting Trump with the ability to trumpet that he has opened up access to its domestic markets even though nothing material is likely to change.
Indeed, unless Trump is forced to lower the rates on other countries’ auto and auto parts exports to the US, along with his sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminium and copper, the Japanese negotiators have given their key exporters a competitive edge.
Trump says there’s never been anything like the deal with Japan. He may be right, even if it appears he doesn’t understand how it might play out in practice.
There is a very large non-trade element to the deal. Japan has promised, it seems, to invest up to $US550 billion ($830 billion) in the US, at Trump’s direction and with the US allocated 90 per cent of any profits the investments might generate.
The White House described the funding as the “centrepiece” of the agreement with Japan, with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent saying Japan had been awarded the 15 per cent tariff rate “because they were willing to provide this innovative financing mechanism”.
There are few details available on what is being loosely described as a Japanese sovereign wealth fund dedicated to investing in strategic sectors such as semi-conductors, pharmaceuticals, steel, shipbuilding, critical minerals and energy in the US.
The Japanese say the funds will come from their state banks and government agencies and will be in the form of equity, debt and guarantees. That suggests the $US550 billion, if it ever materialises, will be largely loans and loan guarantees for Japanese and US companies investing in projects Trump deems important.
The detail will matter. Having effectively been extorted into agreeing to provide the funding, they are hardly likely to hand over $US550 billion without conditions and safeguards to someone who has declared bankruptcy four times.
Loading
They also have China’s precedent to guide them. To end Trump’s 2018-19 trade war, China agreed to buy a massively increased volume of US products. It eventually bought a little more than half what it had agreed to.
Japan can slow-walk the handing over of the funds, knowing that, if it stretches the process out, a new administration in 2029 might have different views on trade.
The investment agreement – apparently the brainchild of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick as it became clear Japan wasn’t going to accede to Trump’s most aggressive demands for market access – is a peculiar one if Trump’s aim is, as he has always claimed, to reduce America’s trade deficit.
If Japan were to actually deliver $US550 billion of new capital inflows to the US, it would increase the trade deficit, not decrease it. It would also probably help push up the value of the US dollar, which has been tumbling, making US exports less competitive in international markets. Did anyone explain that to Trump?
Trump says there’s never been anything like the deal with Japan. He may be right, even if it appears he doesn’t understand how it might play out in practice.
The deal with Japan provides a benchmark for the European Union, which appears very close to either agreeing to its own deal or walking away and retaliating with punitive tariffs on US imports.
It could probably live with a 15 per cent rate and no cap on its auto exports, provided there is nothing in the US demands that relates to its valued-added tax system or its regulation of social media platforms and big technology companies.
Once Trump’s August 1 deadline for deals is reached, the larger picture of Trump’s trade wars will be clear, if still quite messy with its range of different tariffs, different rates and side-deals like the Japanese funding.
Loading
Crudely, however, the new “baseline” tariff rate for America’s major trading partners now appears to be 15 per cent. The average effective US tariff rate will have risen from about 2.4 per cent before he took office again to around 20 per cent.
Trade flows will be distorted, global supply chains severely disrupted, US companies and consumers will be paying a big new tax on their spending and the US inflation rate, and interest rates, will be higher than they would otherwise have been. Will that make America great again?
The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.
