Tariff Revival: The Data Behind The Narrative - Socials Explode

Alright, let's get into this tariff business. Again. It feels like we're stuck in a broken record loop, but maybe—just maybe—there's a slight variation in the tune this time around.

Tariff Threat 2.0: Market Yawn or Calculated Bluff?

The Return of the Tariff Man (or is it?) So, the US is dusting off those tariff plans after a 90-day "pause" that ended on July 9, 2025. The pause was supposedly implemented after market turmoil back in April. (Remember that dip? I do.) Now, we're looking at potential tariffs on over 20 countries, mirroring those initial proposals from April. The big hitters: 35% on Canada, 30% on the EU and Mexico, 25% on Japan and South Korea, and a whopping 50% on Brazil. And, because why not, rumblings of new levies on imported copper and a potential 200% tariff on pharmaceutical imports if US producers don't haul their operations back stateside. President Trump, naturally, took to Truth Social, because that’s where global economic policy is now decided, apparently. He essentially told countries to get their US trade deals finalized by noon on July 7th or face the music – in the form of a lovely letter detailing their new tariff rate. Japan, Kazakhstan, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, South Africa, and South Korea got these letters, threatening tariffs up to 40% and additional levies if they reroute goods. And, just to add extra sting, the letters promised even higher tariffs if anyone dared to retaliate. The initial tariff announcements in April caused some market jitters, as one would expect. But last week, the S&P 500 only slipped 0.2%. Equities in Japan and South Korea even saw a slight uptick, suggesting, perhaps, that the market is calling Trump's bluff. (Or maybe they're just numb to the chaos at this point.) What's interesting is the seeming disconnect between the rhetoric and the real-world impact. We're seeing headlines about "sweeping tariffs," but the market reaction is… muted. Is it because the market's already priced this in? Or is it because everyone knows these threats are just that – threats?

Trade Deals: A Scattershot Approach?

Deals, Diversions, and Debt On the deal front, the US finalized a deal with the UK on May 8, 2025. It's more of a framework for future talks than anything concrete, and it keeps a 10% across-the-board tariff in place. A deal was also struck with Vietnam on July 2, 2025, though details are, shall we say, "unclear." Trump claimed imports from Vietnam would face 20% tariffs, doubling the rate from April 5th, but still below the 46% "reciprocal" tariff floated on "Liberation Day." Vietnam, for its part, apparently agreed to eliminate its tariff barriers. This all feels a bit…scattershot. Are we aiming for genuine trade reform or just creating a climate of uncertainty to extract concessions? And are those concessions actually beneficial in the long run? Meanwhile, Canada is speeding up trade talks with ASEAN to lessen its reliance on the US market. South Korea, Indonesia, and Vietnam are also chasing new trade agreements and strengthening ties with the EU and Australia. Indonesia is reportedly close to finalizing a deal to eliminate most tariffs with the EU. It’s like everyone's hedging their bets, diversifying their portfolios, and not putting all their eggs in the US basket. On the macro level, global trade rebounded by around $300 billion in the first half of 2025. Most of those gains were in developed economies, while developing-country exports and south-south flows were relatively weak. We're also seeing a decline in trade concentration and nearshoring. And this is the part of the report that I find genuinely puzzling. If the goal is to bring manufacturing back to the US, why are we seeing a decline in nearshoring? Shouldn't companies be moving production closer to home? The US dollar has weakened despite higher US interest rates, while the euro has gained ground, supported by efforts to deepen fiscal integration within the EU. And then there's the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed by the US Congress, which enacts tax cuts and spending increases projected to add $5.5 trillion to the country’s public debt over the next decade. (Yes, trillion with a "T.") So, we're slapping tariffs on everyone while simultaneously increasing our debt. Does that make sense? The Israel-Iran escalation has hammered Iran’s economy, with 35% inflation, 18% poverty, and shrinking output. The EU’s new Defence Readiness Omnibus aims to fast-track permitting and unlock funding as Europe boosts defense spending. And at the APEC summit in Gyeongju, China's President Xi Jinping called for maintaining supply chain stability. Trump left the summit early after striking deals with Xi meant to ease their trade war. He described his meeting with Xi on Thursday as a roaring success, saying Beijing had agreed to allow the export of rare earth elements and to start buying US soya beans in exchange for slashing tariffs. Déjà Vu All Over Again? So, what does it all mean? Well, public majorities in twelve allied countries with U.S. treaties believe Trump’s economic policies will negatively affect their country’s relationship with the United States, according to a recent Ipsos poll. Months-long protests against Mulino's government in Panama have paralyzed parts of the country. The US has historically had low tariffs and a trade deficit, in contrast to the EU (low tariffs, trade surplus), India (high tariffs, trade deficit), and China (high tariffs, trade surplus). The number of manufacturing jobs in the US has fallen from about 17 million to 13 million over the last thirty years—to be more exact, 13 million today. Panama City established diplomatic relations with Beijing in 2017. President Trump announced on April 2, so-called Liberation Day, that his administration would impose an expansive new slate of tariffs on about sixty countries or trading blocs that held a high trade deficit with the United States. Trump's original ninety-day delay of his "Liberation Day" levies, which would be the largest U.S. tariff increase in nearly a century, expires on July 8. The US president left the country before the summit, after reaching several deals with Xi meant to ease their escalating trade war. Smoke and Mirrors, or Something More? The question is, are these tariffs a genuine attempt to reshape global trade, or are they just a negotiating tactic? Are we seeing a fundamental shift in US economic policy, or is this just more of the same bluster we've come to expect? The data is… ambiguous. The muted market reactions suggest that the market either doesn't believe these tariffs will be fully implemented or has already factored them in. The diversification efforts by other countries indicate a lack of confidence in the long-term stability of US trade policy. And the increasing US debt raises questions about the sustainability of this approach. So, are we dancing to a new tune, or is this just a remix of an old favorite? Is This Just a Very Expensive Game of Chicken? The data suggests we're seeing a high-stakes game of chicken, with potentially disastrous consequences if no one blinks. The "dance" is the same, but the music's getting louder, and the stakes are higher.