Global trade partners, including Britain, Japan, the European Union, and South Korea, are grappling with mounting frustration as promised tariff reductions by US President Donald Trump remain unrealized months after high-profile announcements. The delays are inflicting significant economic damage on key industries such as steel and automotive manufacturing, with billions in losses and growing uncertainty threatening businesses worldwide.
Broken Promises and Economic Strain
In May, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer stood at a Jaguar Land Rover factory and heralded a landmark trade deal with the United States, one that would slash US tariffs on British steel to zero. Yet, more than three months later, the steel industry remains in limbo. Peter Brennan, director of trade and economic policy at UK Steel, recently expressed deep concern over the lack of progress, noting that many members have seen a sharp decline in US orders due to the persistent uncertainty surrounding the 25 percent import tax.
One British steel producer, known for its price-competitive products, faces a dire future, with Brennan warning that the company could shutter by the end of 2025 if the tariffs are not reduced as promised. He added last week that the urgency to finalize the deal appears to be waning on both sides of the Atlantic, with the issue seemingly slipping down the priority list for both the UK and US governments. 
The frustration is not unique to Britain. Across the globe, trade partners who celebrated similar assurances of tariff relief are still waiting for implementation. Japan, the European Union, and South Korea—major players in the global automotive market—announced over the past month that Washington had granted them leniency on auto exports amid negotiations over Trump’s sweeping tariff policies, which took effect on August 7. However, the reality on the ground tells a different story.
Automotive Powerhouses Hit Hard
For Japan, the EU, and South Korea, the stakes are particularly high. Unlike Britain, these regions face a staggering 50 percent duty on steel and aluminum exports to the US, compounded by a 25 percent levy on imported vehicles like Toyotas, BMWs, and Hyundais, justified by the US on national security grounds. Despite promises of relief, the auto tariffs remain unchanged, bleeding their industries dry.
Japan’s chief trade negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa, voiced his exasperation on August 15, stating that the damage to the country’s car industry continues unabated. He urged the US to issue an executive order promptly to enact the agreed-upon reductions. Akazawa highlighted the acute pain felt by Japanese automakers, with one company reportedly losing 100 million yen (approximately US$670,000) every hour due to the tariffs. Nissan Motor, for instance, revised its projected financial hit from 450 billion yen to 300 billion yen for the year, though its chief executive, Ivan Espinosa, cautioned that accurate forecasts remain elusive without clarity on when—or if—the tariffs will be adjusted.
In the European Union, a handshake between European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Trump in Scotland three weeks ago sealed what was described as an all-inclusive tariff rate of 15 percent, understood by Brussels officials to apply to cars as well. Yet, no tangible relief has materialized. Hildegard Muller, president of the German automotive industry association VDA, emphasized the ongoing burden on manufacturers and suppliers, telling Bloomberg News on August 14 that the costs have already reached billions and continue to climb with no resolution in sight.
Dr. Cecilia Malmstrom, a former European commissioner for trade and now a non-resident fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, suggested that the delays might be administrative. However, she warned that prolonged inaction could provoke significant pressure on the European Commission to retaliate, particularly from carmakers in Germany, Italy, France, and Sweden. The vagueness of the EU-US deal, along with similar ambiguities in agreements with other partners, risks perpetual negotiations and stalling tactics.
South Korea’s Balancing Act
South Korea, which announced a trade pact with Washington on July 31, faces parallel challenges. The agreement promised a 15 percent tariff on imports to the US, including autos, alongside a substantial US$350 billion investment pledge from Seoul focused on shipbuilding and US$100 billion in energy purchases. While the universal 15 percent tariff took effect in early August, the sectoral auto tariff remains stubbornly at 25 percent.
Despite resilient overall exports in the first half of 2025—bolstered by companies front-loading shipments in anticipation of higher US tariffs—South Korea’s auto exports to the US plummeted by nearly 17 percent, with steel exports declining by over 11 percent, according to trade data. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Joanna Chen estimated that South Korea’s leading automakers, Hyundai Motor and affiliate Kia, could face additional costs of up to US$5 billion this year, even under the proposed 15 percent auto tariff. While avoiding the full 25 percent levy would save over US$3 billion, the duty still squeezes margins amid softening demand and tighter subsidies, heightening competition with Japanese manufacturers.
The upcoming summit on August 25 between South Korean President Lee Jae Myung and Trump—their first meeting since Lee took office in June—will be a critical test of the durability of the investment pledge and the broader US-South Korea alliance. Sensitive issues such as defense spending, US troop levels, and North Korea policy are likely to complicate discussions on trade relief.
Delays and Diminishing Trust
The pattern of delayed implementation is not new. Japan’s Akazawa noted that even with Britain, key parts of their trade deal took 54 days to materialize. He suggested that receiving an executive order from the US by mid-September would not be unreasonable under the circumstances. However, the prolonged uncertainty has eroded confidence among trade partners. Sam Lowe, a partner at Flint Global in London and head of its trade and market access practice, remarked that these delays are a stark reminder that negotiations in international trade are rarely truly finalized, particularly with additional US tariffs looming for sectors like pharmaceuticals and semiconductors.
Global Implications of Stalled Trade Deals
The broader implications of these stalled agreements extend beyond immediate economic losses. For countries like Japan and South Korea, which rely heavily on exports to the US market, the uncertainty undermines long-term planning and investment decisions. In Europe, the mounting frustration among automakers could strain transatlantic relations if retaliatory measures come into play. Meanwhile, Britain’s steel industry serves as a cautionary tale of how political promises can falter under bureaucratic inertia or shifting priorities.
The tariffs, initially imposed under the guise of national security, have sparked debates about the legitimacy and effectiveness of such measures in a globalized economy. Critics argue that the levies disproportionately harm allies while failing to deliver the intended boost to domestic industries. Supporters, however, maintain that protecting strategic sectors remains a priority for the US, even at the cost of strained international partnerships.
As the wait for tariff relief drags on, the economic toll continues to mount. Industries across multiple continents are caught in a holding pattern, unable to plan for the future while losses accumulate. For policymakers, the challenge lies in balancing domestic priorities with the need to maintain trust and cooperation with key trade partners. Whether Trump’s administration will deliver on its promises remains an open question, but the clock is ticking for businesses teetering on the edge.
As negotiations stretch into the coming months, the global trade landscape hangs in a precarious balance, with the potential for either renewed cooperation or deepening discord on the horizon.
