How did the United States reach tariff figures?

The markets have turned their eyes on how President Donald Trump’s administration reached the figures behind the comprehensive definitions of the US imports announced on Wednesday, Which sent global financial markets retreat Fears all over the world raised.

Trump and the White House have published a series of plans on social media that separate tariff prices that other countries are imposed on the United States, which narrated those alleged rates that include “manipulating currency and commercial barriers for countries.”

The adjacent column shows the new American tariff rates in each country as well as the European Union.

These rates, in most cases, are about half of the Trump administration that every country “accused” the United States. CNBC has not independently verifying the US administration data on these duties.

It didn’t take a long time for market monitors to try to reversing the formula of formula – to Concerning results. Many, including journalist and author James Sorwiki, said that the United States seems to have Department of Commerce in imports From a specific country to reach the customs tariff rates for individual countries.

This methodology is not necessarily in line with the traditional approach to calculating the definitions and means that the United States would have only been considered in the trade deficit in goods and ignoring trade in services.

For example, the United States said China is receiving a tariff of 67 %. The United States ran a deficit $ 295.4 billion with China in 2024, while imported goods were worth $ 438.9 billionAccording to official data. When $ 295.4 billion is divided into $ 438.9 billion, the result is 67 %. The same mathematics examines Vietnam.

“The formula revolves around commercial imbalances with the United States instead of mutual tariffs in the sense of the level of tariffs or distortions at the level of conflict,” said Tennin Ngwin, an expert in Asia, who is emerging in Natsesis. “This makes it very difficult for the Asians, especially the poorest Asian countries, asking the United States to reduce customs duties in the short term because the standard buys more American goods than exporting them to the United States.”

“Given that American goods are much more expensive, and the purchase strength is less for countries targeted at the highest levels of definitions, this option is not optimal,” Ngawin said. “Vietnam, for example, emerges in obtaining the fourth largest trade surplus with the United States and has already been reduced by definitions against the United States before the declaration of customs tariffs without any postponement.”

It seems that the United States has applied a 10 % tax on the areas where it runs a trade surplus.

The American Commercial Representative Office put his approach On its websiteWhich seemed somewhat similar to what actually appeared in Sleber Sleutes, except for some differences.

Ustr said: “While calculating the commercial reverse effects of tens of thousands of tariffs, organizational and tax policies and other policies in each country are complex, if not impossible, their common effects can be imposed by calculating the level of customs tariffs in line with the bilateral trade deficit to zero.” “If the trade deficit is fixed due to the unknown and unknown policies and basics, the customs tariff rate is consistent with the compensation of these policies and the basics mutual and fair.”

Ustr also included estimates of import flexibility to import import prices – in other words, the sensitivity of the demand for foreign commodities for prices – and the transfer of high tariffs to the high prices of imported goods.

This screenshot of the USTR page appears in more methodology and formula that he said is used:

Some analysts have acknowledged that the US government methodology can give it more space to kick to reach an agreement.

“All I can say is that the ambiguity surrounding the tariff numbers may add some flexibility in contracting deals, but it may come at a cost to the credibility of the United States,” said Rob Subarmanan, head of global macro research in Nomura.

– KEVIN Breuninger of CNBC contributed to this article.