Trump hails 'big progress' in Japan tariff talks

Aryeh Jay · Sunday at 8:32 AM

7thKeeper said:
You are mixing concepts there. A trade imbalance doesn't equal tariffs.

Wait, so your saying that I don't need to impose a 70 million % tariff against Walmart because of reasons?

o_mlly · Sunday at 12:34 PM

7thKeeper said:
Japan didn't launch tariffs, The USA did.

The historical imbalances of trade vis-a-vis the US and Japan indicate that Japan's tariff and non-tariff impediments to free trade with the USA required retaliation to normalize trade practices.

7thKeeper said:
Nothing forced them (Japanese) to buy something made in the USA ...

Did you miss the recent example of Japan's tariff on rice in order to protect Japanese rice growers?

Nithavela · Sunday at 1:26 PM

Always in His Presence said:
Why did you edit the title?

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announces trade deal with unidentified country ‘done, done, done, done’

A 30 second read answers why it was unnamed -

“I have a deal done, done, done, done, but I need to wait for their prime minister and their parliament to give its approval, which I expect shortly,” Lutnick told The Post in a statement.

But hey! Creative editing can potentially make Trump look bad to people who don't follow through - good try though - too bad it failed.

So done x 4 means that it still has to go through multiple stations?

7thKeeper · Sunday at 3:35 PM

o_mlly said:
The historical imbalances of trade vis-a-vis the US and Japan indicate that Japan's tariff and non-tariff impediments to free trade with the USA required retaliation to normalize trade practices.

Not really, especially considering that Trump had negotiated a trade deal in 2018 to eliminate quite a few of the tariffs that had existed on both sides at that time. USA just in general consumes more.

FACT SHEET on U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement

Under President Trump’s leadership, the United States and Japan have reached agreement on early achievements from negotiations in the areas of market access for certain agriculture and industrial goods, as well as on digital trade. The United States looks forward to further negotiations with...

ustr.gov

o_mlly said:
Did you miss the recent example of Japan's tariff on rice in order to protect Japanese rice growers?

You really shouldn't edit a quote to make it seem like I wrote something I didn't (even if it's a minor edit), that's against the rules iirc. And that quote was about your example, so I'm not sure why you're bringing something else up now.

And some specific tariffs aren't anything special, each country (USA included) will protect some of their domestic sources, especially agricultural ones, from being pushed out by foreign sources. This is already just basic common sense, because you want to have thriving sources for basic needs within your own country in cases of emergency.

o_mlly · Sunday at 9:12 PM

7thKeeper said:
Not really, especially considering that Trump had negotiated a trade deal in 2018 to eliminate quite a few of the tariffs that had existed on both sides at that time.

And did you see the trade imbalances decrease substantially? No.

International Trade

www.census.gov

2025 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
Month	Exports	Imports	Balance
Jan-25	6,014.20	12,814.50	-6,800.30
Feb-25	6,400.90	11,127.70	-4,726.80
TOTAL 2025	12,415.20	23,942.20	-11,527.00

2024 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2024	79,740.80	148,208.60	-68,467.70

2023 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2023	75,683.10	147,238.00	-71,554.90

2022 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2022	80,221.80	147,999.10	-67,777.30

2021 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2021	74,730.00	134,799.60	-60,069.70

2020 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2020	64,030.30	119,506.50	-55,476.20

2019 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
Month	Exports	Imports	Balance
TOTAL 2019	74,479.70	143,591.00	-69,111.30

2018 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2018	75,163.80	142,228.30	-67,064.50

7thKeeper said:
You really shouldn't edit a quote to make it seem like I wrote something I didn't (even if it's a minor edit), that's against the rules iirc. And that quote was about your example, so I'm not sure why you're bringing something else up now.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

7thKeeper said:
And some specific tariffs aren't anything special, each country (USA included) will protect some of their domestic sources, especially agricultural ones, from being pushed out by foreign sources. This is already just basic common sense, because you want to have thriving sources for basic needs within your own country in cases of emergency.

Yes. You are now seeing the point of the US imposing tariffs on unfair trading partners. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

FreeinChrist · Sunday at 9:44 PM

o_mlly said:
And did you see the trade imbalances decrease substantially? No.

International Trade

www.census.gov

2025 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
Month Exports Imports Balance
Jan-25
6,014.20 12,814.50 -6,800.30
Feb-25
6,400.90 11,127.70 -4,726.80
TOTAL 2025 12,415.20 23,942.20 -11,527.00
2024 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2024 79,740.80 148,208.60 -68,467.70
2023 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2023 75,683.10 147,238.00 -71,554.90
2022 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2022 80,221.80 147,999.10 -67,777.30
2021 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2021 74,730.00 134,799.60 -60,069.70
2020 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2020 64,030.30 119,506.50 -55,476.20
2019 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
Month Exports Imports Balance
TOTAL 2019 74,479.70 143,591.00 -69,111.30
2018 : U.S. trade in goods with Japan
TOTAL 2018 75,163.80 142,228.30 -67,064.50

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes. You are now seeing the point of the US imposing tariffs on unfair trading partners. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Do you think the fact that Japan has about 124,000,000 people compared to the US having approximately 347,000,000 people could affect the trade deficit?

7thKeeper · Sunday at 11:47 PM

o_mlly said:
And did you see the trade imbalances decrease substantially? No.

Doesn't matter, the trade imbalance as you put it doesn't mean there's anything necessarily wrong with it. I'm finding it bizarre that you, like Trump, seem to require some sort of 1-to-1 ratio here for things to be "fair".

o_mlly said:
I have no idea what you are talking about.

You edited my post in your quote. And the rest is a clear continuation of the arguement you made previously, shouldn't be hard to follow.

o_mlly said:
Yes. You are now seeing the point of the US imposing tariffs on unfair trading partners. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

You seem to have a hard time understanding the difference between precisely targeted tariffs and universal ones that just raise prises all around. Like said before, USA had the same kind of tariffs as well before in place as well. Something that you don't seem to acknowledge at all.

7thKeeper · Sunday at 11:52 PM

FreeinChrist said:
Do you think the fact that Japan has about 124,000,000 people compared to the US having approximately 347,000,000 people could affect the trade deficit?

Also, a bit of a difference in GDP per capita as well. Quite lopsided towards the USA in fact.

o_mlly · Monday at 6:49 AM

FreeinChrist said:
Do you think the fact that Japan has about 124,000,000 people compared to the US having approximately 347,000,000 people could affect the trade deficit?

We each have the same ratio of producers to consumers, ie = 1. So, no I don't think the population difference matters.

o_mlly · Monday at 7:06 AM

7thKeeper said:
Doesn't matter, the trade imbalance as you put it doesn't mean there's anything necessarily wrong with it. I'm finding it bizarre that you, like Trump, seem to require some sort of 1-to-1 ratio here for things to be "fair".

? What ratio other than 1 to 1 would be "fair" and why in your opinion?

7thKeeper said:
You edited my post in your quote. And the rest is a clear continuation of the arguement you made previously, shouldn't be hard to follow.

?? Still have no idea what point you are trying to make.

7thKeeper said:
You seem to have a hard time understanding the difference between precisely targeted tariffs and universal ones that just raise prises all around. Like said before, USA had the same kind of tariffs as well before in place as well. Something that you don't seem to acknowledge at all.

Really? What is your math that determines a fair "precisely targeted tariff"?

A precisely targeted tariff can also be a universal tariff imposed on a trade partner who by trading unfairly has historically sustained a negative balance in trading with the US. Think about it.

wing2000 · Monday at 7:08 AM

o_mlly said:
And did you see the trade imbalances decrease substantially? No.

A trade inbalance is irrelevent.
The American economy has out-performed the Japanee economy for the last four decades.

wing2000 · Monday at 7:09 AM

Always in His Presence said:
Trump hails 'big progress' in Japan tariff talks

Trump jumps in on preliminary talks with trade officials

Japan one of the first countries to start tariff negotiations

More than 75 countries seeking deals, Washington says

Exchange rates not part of talks, Tokyo's negotiator says

...and the deal?

o_mlly · Monday at 7:27 AM

wing2000 said:
A trade inbalance is irrelevent.

Really? Then the administration's imposition of tariffs to correct long standing trade imbalances is a nothing burger. Move on to the next thread.

wing2000 said:
The American economy has out-performed the Japanee economy for the last four decades.

And the reputable source that supports your claim is? And why do you think that matters?

wing2000 · Monday at 7:33 AM

o_mlly said:
Really? Then the administration's imposition of tariffs to correct long standing trade imbalances is a nothing burger. Move on to the next thread.

Yes, it's a big nothing burger from an exonomic perspective. Sorry that you have swallowed this non-sense.

o_mlly said:
And the reputable source that supports your claim is? And why do you think that matters?

Why should I bother sourcing? Anyone who has taien Economics 101 knows a trade "inbalance" is not a bad thing.

o_mlly · Monday at 7:45 AM

wing2000 said:
Yes, it's a big nothing burger from an exonomic perspective.

Thank you for your deep insights as well. You may also move onto another thread.

wing2000 said:
Why should I bother sourcing?

Of course you need not bother citing a non-existent source. Your opinions are always sufficient. Case closed. Next?

Laodicean60 · Monday at 8:18 AM

Trade Surplus with the U.S.: Japan recorded a substantial trade surplus of approximately ¥9 trillion (about $63 billion) with the United States during the fiscal year ending in March 2025. This surplus was primarily driven by exports of automobiles and semiconductor manufacturing equipment. AP News
Overall Trade Deficit: Despite the surplus with the U.S., Japan faced a global trade deficit of ¥5.3 trillion (approximately $34 billion) in 2024, marking its fourth consecutive year of deficits. This was attributed to increased energy import costs and a weaker yen. AP News

Since Japan has a trade surplus with the USA, why have tariffs on USA-made goods?

o_mlly · Monday at 11:48 AM

Laodicean60 said:
Since Japan has a trade surplus with the USA, why have tariffs on USA-made goods?

I think you may be misinterpreting your data. Japan reporting a surplus with the US is identical to the US reporting a deficit with Japan. See post #65.

DaisyDay · Monday at 12:16 PM

wing2000 said:
Yes, it's a big nothing burger from an exonomic perspective. Sorry that you have swallowed this non-sense.

More like a crapburger. Exonomic is an actual, but rarely used, word; I assume this is a typo as that makes perfect sense.

wing2000 said:
Why should I bother sourcing? Anyone who has taien Economics 101 knows a trade "inbalance" is not a bad thing.

I really don't get the concept behind this "thinking". Suppose I spend the day doing manual labor for cash and receive $95 at the end of the shift. You spend the day fishing and end the day with a chest full of fish. If I give you $5 for a fish then I get a fish and you get $5. If I have nothing in turn to sell to you, being cash-rich and resource-poor, does that mean that you are cheating me by not buying anything from me?

If you take that $5 and buy beer from a guy selling loose beer on the dock, would he then be cheating you if he doesn't buy $5 worth of fish from you? You got the beer and he got the cash - how is this unfair?

wing2000 · Monday at 2:02 PM

DaisyDay said:
More like a crapburger. Exonomic is an actual, but rarely used, word; I assume this is a typo as that makes perfect sense.

Yea, a pre-coffee typo, but I agree, it does make sense.

A2SG · Monday at 10:35 PM

DaisyDay said:
More like a crapburger. Exonomic is an actual, but rarely used, word; I assume this is a typo as that makes perfect sense.

I really don't get the concept behind this "thinking". Suppose I spend the day doing manual labor for cash and receive $95 at the end of the shift. You spend the day fishing and end the day with a chest full of fish. If I give you $5 for a fish then I get a fish and you get $5. If I have nothing in turn to sell to you, being cash-rich and resource-poor, does that mean that you are cheating me by not buying anything from me?

If you take that $5 and buy beer from a guy selling loose beer on the dock, would he then be cheating you if he doesn't buy $5 worth of fish from you? You got the beer and he got the cash - how is this unfair?

There's a famous quote from Nobel prize winning economist Robert Solow that illustrates exactly why this whole thing is a nothingburger: "I have a chronic deficit with my barber who doesn't buy a damned thing from me."

-- A2SG, don't know much about economics, but it does make perfect sense....

Trump hails 'big progress' in Japan tariff talks

Living the dream, experiencing the nightmare.

“Behold, I make all things new.”

you're in charge you can do it just get louis

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announces trade deal with unidentified country ‘done, done, done, done’​

Venture life, Burn your Dread

“Behold, I make all things new.”

CF Advisory team

Venture life, Burn your Dread

Venture life, Burn your Dread

“Behold, I make all things new.”

“Behold, I make all things new.”

E pluribus unum

E pluribus unum