In a recent cabinet meeting, President Trump demonstrated his loose interpretation of "trade deal," suggesting it encompasses various types of trade arrangements, even those lacking formal consent from the nations involved. The administration is currently pursuing negotiations with key global players in light of impending tariffs scheduled for August 1.
Typically, traditional trade deals entail extensive documentation and lengthy negotiations, often encompassing hundreds of pages. However, Trump and his advisors have begun using the phrase to describe more simplistic agreements, such as a brief framework with Britain established in May, which still requires significant negotiation to finalize its details.
Additionally, a recent "handshake agreement" with Vietnam has been dubbed a “Great Deal of Cooperation” by the president, although no concrete text or specifics have emerged to validate these claims. This ambiguity raises questions about what elements are genuinely secured versus what remains speculative.
Moreover, Trump has redefined the conventional notion of a trade deal to include the truce reached with China in June, which primarily consisted of an agreement to roll back tariffs rather than instituting new trade regulations. This distinction between actual changes versus reverting to previous terms complicates discourse surrounding international trade agreements.
In a further testament to his interpretation, at the same cabinet meeting, Trump described unilateral notifications he had sent to various governments regarding new tariff rates as “deals”, despite these arrangements lacking mutual consent. The evolving language surrounding trade deals continues to blurs the lines in international trade, emphasizing the need for clear definitions and mutual understanding among nations.
