US firms supporting Trump’s trade fight

US stores are filled with European jams like St Dalfour and Bonne Maman, part of the $200 million Europe exports to the US annually, while American-made jelly is rarely found in Europe.

The US exports less than $300,000 of jam annually to the European Union, a stark contrast to the European influx into the US market, Caliber.Az reports, citing foreign media.

JM Smucker, a leading US company in fruit spreads, points the finger at the EU’s 24%-plus import tariff on its products. The company recently sent a letter to the White House, blaming the tariff for the disparity and urging the Trump administration to take action as it moves to introduce "reciprocal" tariffs on America's major trading partners.

"The miniscule value of US exports to the European Union is entirely attributable to the high EU tariff," the company wrote. "Reciprocal US tariffs on EU jams and jellies would serve to level the playing field," it added, highlighting that the highest tariff on US jam is currently just 4.5%.

Globally, President Trump’s push to apply tariffs against close trading allies has provoked both anger and confusion, with warnings from economists about rising prices and economic repercussions. While some US businesses share concerns over tariffs, Trump’s position resonates with long-standing grievances many US companies have about foreign competition and restrictive policies abroad.

Smucker’s letter is among hundreds submitted to the White House, aimed at influencing the next round of tariffs, expected to be revealed on April 2. Apple growers have flagged the high import duties they face in countries like India (50%), Thailand (40%), and Brazil (10%), alongside sanitary barriers in markets like Australia. Meanwhile, streaming companies have raised alarms over digital taxes in Canada and Turkey, which they argue unfairly target US businesses.

Oil and gas interests criticised Mexican regulations, which require partnerships with the state-owned oil company, while the White House has spotlighted disparities in tariffs, including ethanol duties in Brazil (18%, compared to 2.5% in the US), European car tariffs (10%, compared to 2.5% in the US), and high tariffs on motorcycles in India (previously 100% versus 2.4% in the US).

Trump has framed his plan for reciprocal tariffs as a solution to these issues, calling it "Liberation Day." Yet, despite the focus on tariffs, businesses seeking action on their own specific issues remain hesitant, concerned that such measures might spark retaliation or escalate into a full-blown trade war.

The President’s conflicting statements have created uncertainty ahead of the 2 April deadline, as Trump has introduced tariffs on foreign cars and car parts while promising a more "pleasant" approach in other areas. India, for instance, has already pledged to lower its motorcycle tariffs, seemingly in response to the threat of higher US duties.

William Reinsch, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted, “Some days it’s about revenge and just equalising things, and other days it’s about lowering tariffs and then other days, third days, it’s about bringing manufacturing to the United States."

The mismatch between the broad approach of tariffs and the specific needs of US firms has led to a delicate balancing act, with businesses like NorthStar BlueScope Steel requesting exemptions for raw materials even as they push for expanded tariffs on steel and aluminium parts. Similarly, the Consumer Brands Association has cautioned against overly broad tariffs that could increase costs for US food manufacturers reliant on imported ingredients like cocoa.

Tom Madrecki, the association’s vice president, acknowledged the need for "America First" policies but expressed concern about the potential consequences of sweeping tariffs. "It’s this careful balance between yes, I want you to take an America First trade policy and action to counter unfair trade policies abroad... but maybe not quite in that way," he said.

Wilbur Ross, former US commerce secretary, predicted that concerns would fade as Trump’s plans come into focus, emphasising the importance of 2 April. "He’s very committed. People should have known that something like this was coming because he’s been talking about it for many, many years," he stated.

While traditionally supportive of free trade, Republicans have stood by Trump’s approach, even as it has contributed to market volatility and declining business and consumer confidence. Representative Jodey Arrington of Texas defended the strategy at a trade hearing, acknowledging short-term challenges but asserting that long-term gains would benefit American workers.

“It just seems to me that it’s un-American to not fight for our American manufacturers, producers and workers to simply have an even playing field,” Arrington remarked. "We’re simply attempting... to reset those relationships such that we’re playing by the same set of rules. Then everyone wins."

By Aghakazim Guliyev