Multiple Countries in High-Stakes Talks with the U.S.; EU Considers Invoking “Anti-Coercion Tool” as U.S. Plans Unified Tariffs on 150 Nations

On July 16 local time, U.S. President Trump disclosed a series of tariff-related updates. According to Bloomberg and other foreign media, Trump stated that the U.S. plans to impose tariffs of 10% or 15% on over 150 countries. At the same time, the U.S. is expected to maintain a 25% tariff on Japanese goods, and a deal with India may be reached soon. As the August 1 deadline nears, America’s trading partners are making a “frantic last-minute dash,” with delegations from the European Union and India arriving in Washington for negotiations. While there is cautious optimism regarding a potential deal between the U.S. and India—with reports indicating that India is seeking a rate lower than Indonesia’s 19%—outlooks for a U.S.–EU agreement appear dimmer. TIME quoted experts as saying that ongoing uncertainty introduced by the U.S. has eroded the EU’s trust in the negotiation process, making it more difficult for both sides to reach a consensus. The status of economies that have yet to reach a deal with the U.S. is drawing considerable attention, while countries that have signed agreements—particularly Vietnam and Indonesia—are also at the center of public debate. Whether their deals will serve as models for the rest of Southeast Asia remains in question. According to the BBC, although the experiences of Vietnam and Indonesia are not being overlooked, how other Southeast Asian countries respond will largely depend on their respective dependencies on the U.S. market.

Bloomberg reported that on July 16, Trump told reporters at the White House that he would send “payment notices” to more than 150 countries, mostly smaller economies without significant trade ties to the U.S. In a separate media interview that day, Trump said tariffs on these nations “might be 10% or 15%, we haven’t decided yet.” White House National Economic Council Director Hassett told Fox News that the August 1 deadline set by Trump had triggered “a string of new negotiations,” including with countries that had not previously engaged with the U.S.
Trump also said on July 16 that a trade agreement with India might be reached soon. According to Lianhe Zaobao on July 17, India faces a 26% tariff rate, and its delegation arrived in Washington on Monday to begin talks. The Indian Express reported that this was the fifth round of bilateral negotiations between the two countries.

Politico noted that Trump recently sent “tariff letters” to over 20 economies, suggesting that countries not receiving such letters—such as India—may be closer to reaching a substantive agreement with the U.S. Former U.S. trade representative Linscott commented that “India has already made many concessions, particularly on tariffs.”

Bloomberg quoted Indian officials on July 16 stating that India is pursuing a lower tariff than Indonesia’s 19% in hopes of gaining a competitive edge over other regional economies. Sources said India does not believe it is viewed by the U.S. as a transshipment hub like Vietnam. State Bank of India’s Chief Economist and a member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, Ghosh, noted that the Indian delegation aims to secure a tariff rate below 10%. According to him, India is reluctant to open its agricultural and dairy markets but may offer concessions in industrial sectors. The Times of India reported on July 16 that New Delhi had proposed removing U.S. tariffs on industrial goods, on the condition that the U.S. reciprocates. However, Politico suggested that whatever is announced in the near term would only mark the first phase of a broader trade deal, with a more comprehensive agreement expected in the fall.

According to NHK, Trump stated on July 16, “I think we’ll go with what’s in the letter,” implying that a 25% tariff on Japanese imports could be implemented starting August 1. In response, Japan’s Minister for Economic Revitalization, Akazawa Ryo, held a 45-minute phone call with U.S. Commerce Secretary Lutnick on July 17, during which both sides reaffirmed their respective positions. Nikkei reported that Japanese Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru said in a speech on July 15 in Kurashiki, Okayama Prefecture that the tariff talks with the U.S. “will definitely succeed.” However, Imamura Taku, President of the Marubeni Research Institute, wrote on July 16 that Japan has limited leverage in the negotiations and is unlikely to offer any decisive bargaining chips, even if talks continue.

On July 16, The New York Times reported that Maroš Šefčovič, the EU Commissioner responsible for trade and economic security, had traveled to Washington to engage in talks with U.S. officials. While EU negotiators hoped Trump’s latest tariff threat was merely a bargaining tactic, “the latest White House remarks offered little reassurance,” the article noted. U.S. Treasury Secretary Bassent stated in an interview that the President “doesn’t care whether we impose a 30% tariff or whether the Europeans offer a better deal.”

Šefčovič said this week that “considerable differences” remain between the two sides and that if the U.S. imposes a 30% tariff, “it would be nearly impossible to continue transatlantic trade as before.” Should negotiations fail, the EU is prepared to levy retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods worth €72 billion. According to Euronews on July 17, the EU countries that would be most affected by such measures are Ireland, Germany, and the Netherlands.

Bloomberg reported on July 16 that an increasing number of EU member states believe the bloc should invoke its most powerful trade mechanism if no deal is reached by August 1. Sources revealed that a proposal led by France to activate the EU’s “Anti-Coercion Tool” has gained the backing of at least six member states.

Lianhe Zaobao stated that the “Anti-Coercion Tool” grants Brussels broad authority to retaliate against trade partners, including imposing new taxes on major U.S. tech companies, applying targeted restrictions on U.S. investment in the EU, or limiting access to parts of the EU market. Bloomberg warned that the tool’s activation could trigger a wider transatlantic trade conflict. French Minister Delegate for European Affairs Adade said, “This negotiation requires strength, unity, and determination.” Nevertheless, Bloomberg noted that most EU members and officials still prefer to continue negotiations to break the deadlock while maintaining the threat of countermeasures.

On July 15 local time, the U.S. announced a major agreement with Indonesia. Under the deal, the U.S. will impose a 19% tariff on all Indonesian exports, while allowing duty-free and non-tariff-barrier-free access for U.S. exports to Indonesia. Asia Times on July 16 commented that this asymmetric agreement highlights the transactional nature of U.S. trade policy and places Indonesia in a diplomatically sensitive position. Although 19% is lower than the originally proposed 32%, the relief it offers is limited. This illustrates that leverage has taken precedence over equitable negotiations in this high-pressure game.

The BBC on July 17 reported that Southeast Asian countries are beginning to sign trade agreements with the U.S. under “reciprocal tariff” pressure, with Vietnam and Indonesia leading the way. Lim Fuyan, a professor at Northern University Malaysia, stated that most Malaysians see the deal as unfair to Vietnam. Other major trading partners of Vietnam are also likely to demand similar zero-tariff treatment. Some argue, however, that the agreement benefits Vietnam, as it gives the country a “first-mover advantage” by securing lower U.S. import tariffs compared to other ASEAN nations.

The report also revealed a surprising detail from the U.S.–Vietnam negotiations. Politico previously reported that Vietnam aimed for an 11% tariff rate but did not agree to a 20% rate. The U.S. unexpectedly announced a 20% tariff in the final stages of talks, causing “shock, disappointment, and anger” in Hanoi.

Experts interviewed by the BBC said that while the experiences of Vietnam and Indonesia will not be ignored by other ASEAN nations, each country’s response will depend on its dependence on the U.S. market. For instance, Thailand is reportedly preparing new concessions, whereas Malaysia is unlikely to accept a similar tariff arrangement. On the issue of “transshipment,” Lin Wu, a Vietnam-born scholar at the Australian National University, said the related provisions in the U.S.–Vietnam agreement do not serve as a model—and if they do, not a positive one. Lim Fuyan added that China’s market and investment are equally or even more important than those of the U.S., and that the U.S. has lost credibility as a trade partner due to heightened risks stemming from market uncertainty.

On July 16, CNBC cited the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), which reported that the U.S. tariff policy has introduced new costs and disruptions to global supply chains. UNCTAD Secretary-General Greenspan warned that if the U.S. enforces its maximum proposed tariffs, it could trigger a global economic slowdown with cascading effects—impacting employment and destabilizing multiple countries.