NextFin News - U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer signaled on Thursday that the Trump administration intends to honor existing trade agreements that shield specific allies from broad-based levies, even as the White House moves forward with a proposal for a new 10% global baseline tariff. Speaking in Washington, Greer emphasized that "a deal’s a deal," suggesting that nations like Japan and members of the European Union, which have secured individual arrangements to cap or mitigate U.S. duties, will remain protected under their current terms.
The statement follows the administration’s formal proposal on Wednesday to implement a minimum 10% tariff on nearly all imported goods, a move aimed at reducing the U.S. trade deficit and incentivizing domestic manufacturing. However, the sudden shift toward a "baseline" has sparked intense lobbying from diplomatic partners who recently negotiated complex "peace treaties" on steel, aluminum, and digital services to avoid the very protectionism now being codified. Greer’s comments appear designed to de-escalate tensions with key strategic allies while maintaining the administration’s aggressive posture toward non-aligned trading partners.
Greer, who was confirmed as the 20th U.S. Trade Representative in February 2025, is a central architect of the "America First" trade doctrine. Having served as chief of staff to Robert Lighthizer during the first Trump administration, Greer has a long-standing reputation as a trade hawk who views tariffs not merely as economic tools but as essential leverage for geopolitical negotiation. His career has been defined by a skepticism of multilateralism and a preference for bilateral deals that demand "balance and reciprocity." While his latest remarks offer a reprieve for certain allies, they reflect his broader strategy of using the threat of universal tariffs to force partners into specific, U.S.-favorable concessions.
This "carve-out" approach is not yet a settled consensus within the broader U.S. trade apparatus. While Greer’s office manages the legalities of existing treaties, other factions within the administration have argued that a truly universal tariff is necessary to prevent "transshipment"—where goods from high-tariff countries like China are routed through "friendly" nations to evade duties. The tension between honoring old deals and enforcing a new global floor remains a significant point of friction for importers. For businesses, the lack of a formal, written exemption for these "capped" economies means that Greer’s verbal assurance is currently the only barrier against a sudden 10% spike in landed costs.
The primary risk to Greer’s "deal’s a deal" stance lies in the legal mechanism used to implement the new baseline. If the administration invokes national security statutes, such as Section 232, it could theoretically override existing trade preferences. Furthermore, the definition of what constitutes a "capped" tariff is subject to interpretation; many existing deals with the EU and Japan are temporary "suspensions" rather than permanent treaties. Should the U.S. trade deficit fail to narrow in the second half of 2026, the political pressure to close these loopholes may outweigh the diplomatic desire to honor past handshakes.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
