The United States has imposed a new round of import tariffs on 60 of its largest trading partners, marking the latest escalation in President Donald Trump’s renewed global trade strategy. The measures affect countries accounting for 99.4% of all US imports, including South Africa, China, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan, Canada, Australia, Brazil, India and South Korea.
Under the new policy, countries will face either a 10% or 12.5% tariff on virtually all goods entering the United States. South Africa has been placed in the higher 12.5% tariff category, meaning South African exports entering the US will now generally become 12.5% more expensive for American importers, unless specific exemptions apply.
A tariff is a tax imposed by a government on imported goods. While the tax is paid by the importing company rather than the exporting country itself, the additional cost is often passed on to businesses and consumers through higher prices. Governments typically use tariffs to protect domestic industries by making imported products less competitive, encourage local manufacturing, or gain leverage during international trade negotiations.
The latest tariffs replace a temporary 10% universal import levy that expired on Friday. That temporary measure had itself replaced Trump’s controversial “Liberation Day” tariffs, introduced in April 2025, which imposed import duties of up to 50% on dozens of countries before being struck down by the US Supreme Court earlier this year.
The court ruled that President Trump had exceeded his legal authority by imposing those earlier tariffs under emergency powers, forcing the US government to refund tens of billions of dollars in unlawfully collected duties. In response, the White House sought an alternative legal mechanism to maintain broad import tariffs, ultimately introducing the new measures under legislation linked to forced labour enforcement.
According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), countries that have committed to implementing and effectively enforcing bans on imports linked to forced labour will generally face the lower 10% tariff, while countries deemed not to have made sufficient commitments will be subject to the higher 12.5% rate.
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer defended the new policy, arguing that it addresses both human rights concerns and unfair trade practices.
“Today’s action will begin to correct what is both a human rights abuse and distortive trade practice to improve the welfare of workers everywhere.”
However, several trade experts have questioned whether forced labour is the administration’s primary motivation.
Caroline Freund, Dean of the UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy, believes the White House is instead attempting to preserve President Trump’s broader trade agenda after the Supreme Court invalidated the previous tariff regime.
“I think they were looking for a legal reason to put the tariffs in.”
She added:
“Their goals… are about the trade deficit and US manufacturing. It is not about forced labour.”
A trade deficit occurs when a country imports more goods and services than it exports. President Trump has long argued that reducing America’s trade deficit will strengthen domestic manufacturing, create jobs and reduce dependence on foreign suppliers. Throughout both of his presidencies, tariffs have remained one of his preferred economic tools for pursuing those objectives.
The latest tariffs are expected to have significant implications for global trade.
For businesses exporting to the United States, the higher duties could reduce demand by making their products more expensive compared to American-made alternatives. Some exporters may choose to absorb part of the additional cost to remain competitive, reducing their profit margins, while others may pass the cost directly onto American buyers.
Economic analysts warn that tariffs rarely affect only one country. Because supply chains are globally interconnected, higher import duties can increase production costs, contribute to inflation and ultimately raise prices for consumers.
Wendy Cutler, an economic security expert at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said the financial impact may be softened by the fact that certain goods remain exempt from the tariffs. Nevertheless, she believes many governments will begin looking beyond the United States for future trade opportunities.
According to Cutler, affected countries are likely to accelerate efforts to diversify their export markets and negotiate stronger trade agreements with other regions, reducing their dependence on the American economy.
The United Kingdom also expressed concerns despite receiving the lower 10% tariff rate.
Although British goods face a lower universal tariff than South African exports, UK business groups argue that Britain has effectively lost a competitive advantage because the European Union negotiated broader tariff arrangements covering additional categories of goods.
William Bain, Head of Trade Policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, said British businesses would question why the UK had not secured similar treatment to the EU.
Meanwhile, David Henig of the European Centre for International Political Economy suggested that businesses remain cautious because President Trump’s trade policies frequently change.
“This is President Trump, so anything could change tomorrow or the day after.”
Several governments have openly criticised the new measures.
Brazil described the tariffs imposed on its exports as “unjustified”, while Japan said it regretted the decision. Australia’s Trade Minister Don Farrell similarly called the new duties “completely unjustified.”
China also rejected the allegations underpinning the policy.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said:
“There is no so-called forced labour in China, and we oppose using this as an excuse for political manipulation.”
However, numerous international human rights organisations continue to maintain that forced labour exists in parts of China’s Xinjiang region, particularly involving members of Muslim minority communities.
For South Africa, the decision adds another layer of uncertainty for exporters already facing a challenging international trading environment.
The United States remains one of South Africa’s largest export destinations, with key exports including motor vehicles, automotive components, agricultural products, citrus fruit, wine, minerals, machinery and manufactured goods. A 12.5% tariff could make many of these products less competitive in the American market, particularly where buyers have access to cheaper alternatives produced domestically or sourced from countries facing lower tariffs.
Whether South Africa experiences a significant decline in exports will depend on several factors, including the availability of exemptions, how much of the tariff exporters absorb themselves, currency exchange rates and whether American buyers continue purchasing South African goods despite higher prices.
The latest measures also suggest that President Trump’s broader trade strategy remains firmly intact. While the White House says the tariffs are intended to combat forced labour, the administration has made little secret of its wider objective of encouraging domestic manufacturing and reducing America’s trade deficit.
Washington has also indicated that additional trade measures could follow. The US government is currently investigating 16 countries over allegations of manufacturing overcapacity, raising the possibility that further tariffs may be introduced in the coming months.
For businesses, investors and consumers around the world, the renewed tariff campaign signals that global trade tensions remain far from over. As countries consider retaliatory measures or seek new trading partners, the latest US decision has the potential to reshape international trade flows and increase economic uncertainty across global markets.