US Exporters Vie to Shape Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs Ahead of April 2

In view of the next great commercial move by President Trump, his administration has invited companies to weigh the economic barriers they had to face abroad.

The list of complaints was both temptular and specific. In hundreds of letters subjected to the administration in recent weeks, the manufacturers of uranium, shrimp, shirts and steel have highlighted the unfair commercial treatment that they had to face, in the hope of bending the commercial agenda of the president in their favor. The complaints varied from the high rates of Brazil on ethanol and food for pets, to the high samples of India on almonds and pecan walnuts, to the longtime barriers of Japan to American potatoes.

Trump has promised to review the global commercial system on April 2, when he plans to impose what is calling “mutual rates” which will correspond to the withdrawals and other policies that countries impose on American exports. The president has started calling this “day of liberation”, claiming that years of other countries that “tear us” will end.

On Monday, Mr. Trump seemed to suggest a potential softening of the rates, saying: “I could give to many countries”. He added: “It is mutual, but we could also be more beautiful than that.”

“They accused us so much that I’m embarrassed to accuse them what they accused us,” he said in an event in the White House. “But it will be substantial.”

Trump also reported that the White House could finalize the rates on foreign manufacture cars before April 2, making fun of that an advertisement could arrive “quite early, probably in the next few days”.

Many details of the mutual tariff plan of Mr. Trump remain unclear, but the administration officials have indicated that he would probably have added an additional cost to most or all the products imported from specific countries.

It is not clear how many countries will be affected, but Trump officials have mentioned the “Dirty 15”, a reference to a group of countries that have rates on American products and manage commercial surplus with the United States, presumably including most of the largest American commercial partners.

The mutual tariff plan has created a difficult calculation for many companies, which want to see the commercial barriers canceled but fear ends up at the center of a commercial war that could worsen them. This is because the high Trump approach could generate efforts from other countries to make agreements with the United States and abandon their rates, or could invite retaliation that end up closing foreign markets to American products.

Some American companies see an opportunity on the agenda of Mr. Trump. Many of the letters that companies have presented to the office of the commercial representative of the United States in recent weeks have asked officials to fight for lower commercial barriers on their behalf, highlighting the high withdrawals, onerous inspections or other complications that American exporters face in foreign markets.

But others seem hesitant to put themselves in the president’s crossed hair. Some representatives of the sector say privately that companies have been nervous that by raising their hands to ask for help they could put them at the center of commercial sellers, interrupting the export markets on which they depend and potentially making them a goal for retaliation.

Publicly, many of the largest American exporters – such as commercial groups representing pork exporters, Soy And oil: tempered their documents with words felt on the damage that could derive from the interruption of export markets. The main groups of companies have also continued to solicit the administration to reduce commercial barriers rather than lifting them and focusing on the cultivation of new commercial agreements that would open foreign markets.

“The work of the administration on reciprocity should lead to the removal, not the creation, of the obstacles to trade,” said the technological consumer, who represents technological companies, in his letter to the commercial representative. The group stated that it was “deeply worried” that tariff threats against Europe “would increase global obstacles to trade and dismantle the global trading system”.

Other groups seemed to be aware of the fact that the information that was delivering the Trump administration could become ammunition in a commercial war in which they could be victims. The United States Chamber of Commerce stated that the information they were presenting on commercial barriers “is not intended to justify the application of large -based large rates, but should help US negotiators to focus on specific issues important for American companies of all sizes”.

It remains to be seen if these observations will have a lot of influence on Mr. Trump, who has a history to base commercial policy on his impulses and intuition. But the quantity and variety of responses highlight the huge challenge for the Trump administration while trying to understand how to put its footprint on the global trading system with a few weeks of preparation. And it suggests the controversy that could be waiting for the administration once it finally reveals the details of a commercial policy still defined.

Mr. Trump suggested that his next rates could be radical and influential. But for now, even the fundamental question if the administration’s efforts will entail barriers to the higher or lower trade remains unanswered.

The president said that his guiding principle is reciprocity. If other countries are charged to the high rates of the United States or install other economic barriers, the United States will reflect that treatment for their exports, he said. Trump has often mentioned the high rates of India on motorcycles, European cars rates and its value added tax and Canada protections for its dairy market.

The Treasury Secretary Scott Besent declared last week that the administration planned to elaborate a tariff number For each country that would impose on April 2nd. This number would represent the withdrawals that foreign governments imposed on American products together with other barriers, such as taxes.

Besent said that some countries may be able to pre-nail agreements and do not face further rates. Officials in Great Britain, India, Mexico, Union of Europe and elsewhere have caught such a result, even if some are also developing lists of retaliation if Mr. Trump advances.

Even exactly what the president wants the mutual rates to carry out. The administration of Mr. Trump has mentioned a litany of reasons for its rates, including making the trade more proud for American exporters, eliminate commercial deficits with other nations and generate multiple tariff revenues to finance its tax cuts.

With these still unclear goals, some companies are trying to model the agenda. Many of the commercial observations have indicated China as a primary threat, with companies that highlight the risk that cheap Chinese imports represent various US industries.

The producers of American flags and Jacuzzis complained that the competition from China was threatening to put them out of business. The cultivators of American Christmas trees claimed that the rates on artificial Christmas trees from China would help trees farms. The Pollame industry has criticized Chinese barriers to the sale of American chicken parts, including chicken feet and the tips of the wings.

But many other countries have also been mentioned. The cat fish and plum producers complained about Vietnam commercial barriers. Mais farmers have mentioned the recent prohibition of genetically modified corn Mexico. JM Smucker called the European rates on Jam and Gelatina, while Chobani criticized Canada’s barriers to the imports of Yogurt.

Almost two dozens of sunglasses have highlighted the terrible situation of the American shrimp industry. The Louisiana Shrimp Association asked for a share or other limits to the imports of shrimp, saying that foreign prawns had depressed prices so much that the prawns could not even afford to turn on their boats.

“The volume of cheap and perhaps contaminated shrimp has put the domestic prawn industry in a descendant spiral,” wrote George Barisich, a 69 -year -old temporaryist from Louisiana. “Last year I received a third of the price for the shrimp I got in the 80s.”

Some asked the United States government to distinguish between different parts of the world. The medical producers supported protection from China, but felt they had hit the closest allies of America, stating that they could have unintentional negative consequences.

The producer of Stanley Black & Decker tools said he worked to cut his imports from China to about 15 percent in 2025 – from about 40 percent in 2018 – and which should not be penalized for having moved his supply chains to Mexico.

“Companies like ours who are doing the right thing and leave China should be recognized,” said the company.

Many groups in the sector have also sent letters that discussed the rates on products that are not made in the United States, stating that taxes on spices imports, coffee and Christmas decorations would simply increase prices for American consumers.

The main American export industries, such as corn, pork, oil and soybeans, have highlighted some global barriers but also urged the Trump administration not to damage the export markets on which their sales depend.

Tyson Foods said that negotiating new commercial agreements is important to avoid falling behind other countries, while the National Federation of Milk Manufacturers said that milk exporters operated on disadvantage for foreign competitors because the United States had not kept step by step with the European Union and New Zealand in the insertion of new commercial agreements.

The documents also contained that the legacy of commercial wars can be long -lasting. Some of the barriers that the companies have complained-as China’s high rate on blueberries or a European farewell on the arachid butter-were the result of the first-term commercial wars of Mr. Trump, where the countries re -evaluated against the rates they had met on them.

Even Tesla, whose CEO, Elon Musk, is helping to lead a large part of the president’s strategy, he warned negative effects that rates and retaliation could have on his business. The company observed that the previous US commercial actions had caused an increase in withdrawals on American electric vehicles.

“US exporters are intrinsically exposed to disproportionate impacts when other countries respond to US commercial actions,” said Tesla.

Harley-Davidson, the producer of motorcycles that Trump often mentioned when he talks about reciprocity, said that he was now facing a 25 % retaliation fee that Canada imposed this month in response to US samples. He also warned about a European rate of 50 % on motorcycles that had been suspended but that could return.

“Harley-Davison has become a political goal,” said the company. “This use of our brand in commercial wars not related to our sector is unacceptable.”

Tony Rump Contributed relationships.