The commercial agreement recently signed by the US government with the European Union and Japan was presented as a victory over the White House foreign policy, including a 15% tariff on most exports to North American countries.
However, according to an editorial analysis published by the Bloomberg Agency, “There’s nothing to celebrate.” For the text authors, Clive Crook and Nisid Hajari, these are agreements that produce negative outcomes in all respects. Especially within the territory of the United States itself.
The editor argues that “stricken economics, the statement that the US has won both negotiation sets is simply wrong.”
The US government has announced that these contracts will strengthen their leadership and abstain from the risk of a long-term trade war, but the reality is – according to analysts – American consumers will take on the new tax burden.
“Taxes are taxes. U.S. consumers will soon pay most, if not all, of the costs,” they warn from Bloomberg.
This effect is not limited to an increase in imported products. It also affects the behavior of local businesses. “Producers of American rival goods may experience less pressure on competition and innovation, and sometimes raise prices,” the report said.
A combination of factors – reduced competition and increased costs – directly affects the quality of life of citizens. “As time goes by, these forces will curb standard of living in the United States,” the text says.
US tariffs have made the price of Bitcoin (BTC) react. Between July 31 and August 1, BTC fell 3.14%, from $118,800 to $114,400. At the end of this report, the currency has returned to another US$113,800. After Trump ordered the deployment of nuclear submarines Due to tension with Russia.
Medium-term expectations for BTC remain positive, but the immediate impact shows market sensitivity before new commercial policies and political decisions that will cause panic in the market.
The new White House tariff plan establishes a 10% “universal tariff” on products imported from countries where the US has commercial surplus. For countries with a deficit, a 15% percentage applies. In total, they are around 40 affected countries.
Some face even bigger fees. Syria has a 41% tariff. Laos and Myanmar, 40%. Switzerland, 39%. Iraq and Serbia receive 35%. According to Cryptonoths, Algeria, Bosnia and South Africa report to be 30%.
Companies that avoid greater tensions
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen justified his decision to sign an agreement with Washington on the need to avoid more tensions. European officials stated the agreement It helps to “restore consumer and producer stability and predictability.”
However, Bloomberg analysts believe the statement is premature. “I wish that was,” replies the editorial. For the author, the agreement is full of ambiguity that has not yet been resolved.
One of the most cited examples in the analysis is an agreement with Japan. The document includes Japan’s US Fund funding commitment, presented as a $550 million “signature bonus.”
However, the analysis states, “What really means is Japan’s commitment to funding investment funds managed by the White House? It’s hard to say,” he adds: “Japanese officials probably won’t see it that way.”
The same lack of clarity affects agreements with the European Union. It has been announced that certain European goods have free access to tariffs on the US market, but the document does not specify which. “Which product is it? No one knows,” the report says. According to experts These contracts should not be understood as complete treatiesbut as a definition that has many aspects, the first framework still pending.
They also warn of greater risks. These agreements reinforce the perception that negotiations can continue within the government from a unilateral standpoint.
“We can confirm the belief that what is supposed to be a success of a government is not a genuine association, but is strong enough to demand submission,” they warn. This attitude is not only about commercial policy, It also offers international cooperation in areas such as security, investment and global governance.
For analysts, repeated use of tariffs as a central tool in foreign policy could erode US credibility as a strategic partner. “If the White House is going to resolve all these conflicts that will revive the threat of punitive tariffs in the future, the vision of stability and predictability is merely a mirage,” warns Crook and Hajari.
The analysis ends with a clear warning: A breaking force-generating approach can be counterproductive. “The power of confusion is a self-destructive strategy. Sooner or later, it will become painfully clear,” they write.
Despite successful government ads, the market is already showing signs of tension. The collapse of Bitcoin reflects how even decentralized assets respond to the uncertainty caused by protectionist measures. For publisher authors, The new contract does not strengthen the US’s global position, and may undermine it. They say this country will be the most defeated country in this strategy.
