Labur claimed to have concluded a trade deal with the USA last week.
The problem is that, as the FT points out:
Lower US tariffs on British steel, aluminium and car exports are unlikely to take effect for weeks, according to UK officials, as companies complain about continued uncertainty about the levies despite a bilateral trade deal.
It transpires that no one knows when the reduced tariffs that this 'deal' supposedly delivered might come into effect.
Nor does anyone appear to know how to find out when that might happen.
And the contingencies in play before any change might happen are so great that no one knows if this change will, in fact, ever happen.
So was this a trade deal or a meaningless scrap of paper, as Chamberlain described his 1938 deal with Hitler after it was signed? I am erring, most decidedly, on the side of the 'scrap of paper' argument.
When is a trade deal not a trade deal? When Labour claims it has signed it, of course.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
There is no trade deal, in the sense of a legally binding agreement. And if there was, an international treaty of that nature would require the consent of Congress. But then Congress has been bypassed by Trump’s “emergency” tariffs. So perhaps an unlawful agreement can remove unlawful tariffs.
There is a very short document that says it is not legally binding but rather sets out general terms for an economic prosperity deal. It is, as lawyers would say, an agreement to agree.
Agreed
I mentioned a link to a Lawrence O’Donnell segment from his MSNBC show (The Last Word) last week (which i think you watched) in which O’Donnell went into considerble detail as to why nothing Trump or his minions sign on trade deals, or tariff related stuff, is worth the paper it’s written on, for two reasons: 1. Trump doesn’t have the power to agree trade deals, only Congress does, and, 2. His actions on tariffs are currently the subject of several courts cases in Federal Courts. Why? Because he claims he’s able to take these actions under emergency powers but the conditions cited do not amount to ‘threats to the US’ as he claims. Consequently, once these cases are settled – and I assume they’ll go to the Supreme Court, so could take quite a few weeks – all the tariffs could be overturned.
And just to add, that we’ve seen over the past few days while Trumps been in the Gulf states what sort of deals he prefers: utterly corrupt ones, and the UK just isn’t corrupt enough – yet!
A great deal to agree with – and I did watch. I appreciate you highlighting this material.
It does not help when, on the first page last line, it states clearly that both governments acknowledge that the document is NOT a legally binding agreement. It is nothing more (at best) than an outline of agreed Heads of Terms. It is, however, an illustration of how today’s performative politicians try to pull the wool over the eyes of the people, aided by complicit media outlets.
The arrangement is at best a memorandum of understanding which is worthless.
No steer is desperate to get anything from King Donald.
This is not a proper trade deal it’s about tariffs only.
Expect the UK to be royally shafted.
Correct, it will be.
Somebody good at the dark arts had the great idea of offering Trump an easy “win” so as to shift attention away from the detail. When it emerges, it will indeed leave tbe UK “royally shafted” but there will be little press attention
People forget that we already had trade agreements with the US but Donald Trump tore them up. Even a signed deal will be worthless.
Does this mean it’s just kabuki and we won’t get hormone US beef? And we effectively won’t be so pulled out of alignment of EU ?
Is it cause for a rare bit of hope?
Those responsible for the “Trade ???” (I have no idea what to call it) are Mandelsohn and McSweeney (the latter a protoge of Mandelsohn).
Remind me who elected them?
I came across this rather good rant about McSweeney which also briefly covers the USM-UK Trade ???
https://robinmcalpine.org/morgan-mcsweeney-is-shite/
It is clear that the Brits did not elect a gov’ that governs. It elected glove puppets that do what they are told, for the most part – all controlled by McSweeney, Mandelshon & others. Day by day, the verity of this is demonstrated. I know what I would do, the word Tyburn is involved, but this is a family orienetated blog so I will pass over the erm… details.
Most, if not all, trade deals are put in place to negate the need for tariffs. They are essentially tariff-free agreements for trading goods and services and ideas.
This “deal” is simply a tariff reduction accord that is so shoddily worded it may never be put into effect.
Correct