Hiltzik: Trump's U.K., China 'deals' leave tariff policy more confused than ever

Los Angeles Times - May 13th, 2025

Donald Trump's recent tariff policies, aimed at China and the United Kingdom, have left both experts and markets in a state of confusion. Despite Trump's claims of a 'total reset' in trade relations with China, the actual agreement appears to be a temporary pause, leaving uncertainty looming over international markets. Similarly, the announced deal with the UK lacks concrete outcomes, further contributing to the unpredictability faced by U.S. industries, particularly automakers and farmers.

The implications of Trump's trade maneuvers are significant, as they challenge long-standing international trade norms and raise questions about the U.S.'s reliability as a trading partner. Economists argue that trade deficits, often cited by Trump as justification for his policies, have historically benefited the U.S. economy. The ongoing disruption not only affects global economic relations but also tests the constitutional boundaries of presidential power in trade policy, as highlighted by an upcoming lawsuit questioning the legality of Trump's actions.

Donald Trump U.S. Economy Automotive Industry Global Trade War Agricultural Exports Tariff Policy Uk Trade Deal China Trade Relations International Trade Law

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.0

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a critical analysis of Trump's tariff policies, highlighting the confusion and skepticism surrounding recent trade deals with the U.K. and China. While it covers a timely and relevant topic, the article could benefit from greater transparency and source attribution to enhance its credibility. The lack of balanced perspectives and direct quotes from stakeholders limits its impact and engagement potential. Nevertheless, the article effectively addresses issues of public interest and has the potential to influence public opinion by presenting a critical view of the administration's trade strategies. Improving the balance and transparency of the coverage would strengthen the article's overall quality.

Accuracy

The article provides a detailed account of Trump's tariff policies and their implications, but some claims require verification. For instance, the article mentions a 90-day pause in tariffs with China, which aligns with reports of temporary tariff suspensions. However, the claim about tariffs on Chinese goods reaching up to 145% seems exaggerated and needs verification against official tariff announcements. The mention of the U.K. trade deal being non-legally binding is consistent with other reports, but the details about tariff changes on British cars require further confirmation. The article accurately reflects economists' skepticism about trade deficits but should cite specific studies or expert opinions to bolster its claims.

Balance

The article predominantly critiques Trump's tariff policies, highlighting confusion and skepticism among economists and trade experts. While it presents the administration's perspective through quotes from officials like Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, it lacks a balanced representation of viewpoints supporting the tariff strategy. The piece could benefit from including more voices from proponents of the policy to provide a fuller picture of the debate surrounding trade deficits and tariffs.

Clarity

The article is generally clear in its language and structure, making it accessible to readers. It follows a logical flow, beginning with the announcement of the trade deals and then delving into the implications and criticisms. However, the tone is somewhat critical and could be perceived as biased. While the article effectively communicates the complexity of the tariff policies, it could benefit from more neutral language and a clearer distinction between facts and opinions.

Source quality

The article does not clearly attribute its information to specific sources, which affects its credibility. It references economists and trade experts but does not name them or cite their studies directly. Including quotes or data from recognized institutions or experts would enhance the article's reliability. The lack of direct sources or links to official announcements or studies makes it difficult to assess the authority and reliability of the information presented.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency in terms of disclosing the sources of its information and the methodology behind its claims. It does not explain how it arrived at specific figures, such as the tariff rates or the economic impact on the stock market. Additionally, the article does not address potential conflicts of interest or biases, which could impact its impartiality. Providing more context and background information would improve transparency and help readers understand the basis of the claims made.