Interpreting global events locally: Glocalization of Trump's tariff announcement in American, Slovak, and Ukrainian news

The second Trump administration announced that it would impose reciprocal tariffs on many countries, including friendly ones, in April 2025. The unprecedented high tariff rates except for the first half of the 1900s came as a significant shock to countries all over the world because many economies, especially developed ones have been exploring the path to free trade through lowering tariffs or removing regulations by concluding trade agreements etc. Japan was no exception. This study analyzes the impact of Trump's tariffs on Japanese stock prices. For example, maintaining the status quo in Japan's policy interest rate amid a possible increase suggests a rise in stock prices. A cut in the US policy interest rate would mean a narrowing of the interest rate differential between Japan and the US (US interest rates are significantly higher than Japan's), which would lead to a fall in Japanese stock prices through a stronger Japanese currency, yen. Furthermore, President Trump's posts (SNS), in Japan's case, are generally thought to have had a negative effect on Japanese stock prices. The suggestion of a significant increase in tariff rates by the post is one example of this. This study examines factors that have both positive and negative effects on Japanese stocks and consider the causes of changes in Japanese stock prices. Meanwhile, this study analyzes macroeconomic variables that are thought to affect stock prices: exchange rates and interest rates. The results show that various statements, policy announcements, and posts by President Trump had no impact on Japanese stock prices in a short time; only the exchange rate affected them. Furthermore, exchange rate shocks only affected stock prices for a few days.

This study aims to examine the tariffs imposed by Donald Trump, which he described as reciprocal tariffs designed to reduce the large and persistent trade deficit in the United States and to increase and protect American industries. The study concluded that Trump imposed a 10% tariff on every country with which the United States faced a bilateral trade deficit of 20% or less of the import volume. For other countries, a reduction rate of 50% was applied to the trade deficit percentage of the bilateral trade balance on import volumes. Consequently, Trump's tariffs are deemed unfair and unscientific, warranting either their cancellation or reciprocal treatment by other countries towards the United States.

It looks at how President Trump's period in authority (2017–2021) changed U.S. trade policy, turning away from years of open trade and multilateral agreements. The “America First” approach which comes from economic nationalism, reinstated tariffs by using Sections 232 and 301 and this resulted in a trade war between the United States and China that changed how global trade works. It explores what political factors lie behind the tariffs, their influence on the domestic economy and their effects in other countries. It records issues with global supply chains, the cutting of diplomatic trade ties and the foundation of new groups like CPTPP and RCEP. The outcomes for overseas investment and world trade regulations are also considered in the chapter. With help from studies and research, it discusses Trump's tariffs and suggests they helped lead to an era where nations care more about their own security and independence rather than the best trading outcomes. This shift could point to a different way countries and regions move their trade in the future.

Trump's Tariff Wars and National Security: A Political and Historical Perspective

This paper analyzes the potential effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Trans-Atlantic Trade, Investment Partnership (TTIP) and also tariff-related measures implemented by Trump administration against China’s export. It examines the sectors in which China will be affected most in terms of its competitiveness in the US market against the countries included in these agreements. It also investigates whether China has significant price advantages in certain sectors and whether these agreements and tariff measures have the potential to erode those advantages. The ‘quantity’ and ‘value’ of US imports from the countries included in these agreements are used for calculating ‘quantity similarity indexes’ and ‘price similarity indexes’ in order to compare China to its competitors. Taking into account ‘product heterogeneity’, this paper reveals how Chinese exports will be affected by the elimination of tariff barriers within the context of these agreements and also by the increases in tariffs on Chinese products. The paper also presents policy implications for China to create its own trade and competition measures against these possible trade actions, along with the potential effects of Chinese competition on other countries in the US market. The results indicate that China is likely to be seriously and negatively affected from these prospective agreements and tariff measures. It is also likely that China will lose its price competitiveness against its main competitors in the US market, especially in such sectors as plastics, medical appliances and optical instruments. Last but not the least, the products whose tariffs are increased by the Trump administration are selected in a rational way from the viewpoint of the US, as those products are generally the ones in which TPP and TTIP are relatively ineffective.

Nasdaq Inc. (NDAQ) is one of the leading stock exchanges in the United States, ranking second globally after the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) based on market capitalization. As a highly dynamic and information-sensitive market, Nasdaq Inc. stock prices respond quickly to internal corporate conditions and external macroeconomic or policy changes. One notable event affecting market stability was President Donald Trump's import tariff policy, aimed at protecting U.S. industries from foreign competition, particularly Chinese imports. The implementation of this policy triggered significant volatility, including a sharp decline in Nasdaq Inc. stock prices on March 2, 2025. This study examines the impact of this policy on Nasdaq Inc. stock movements using the ARIMA(0,2,1) model with an intervention of order b=0, r=1, and s=0. The results show that all model parameters are statistically significant and produce accurate forecasts, with a MAPE of 2.19%, an RMSE of 5.98766, and an MAE of 2.05232. These findings indicate that intervention analysis effectively captures the impact of import tariff policies on stock market dynamics and provides valuable insights for investors and policymakers in anticipating market fluctuations driven by global economic policy changes.

One of the goals of the world trade organization is to ensure free and fair trade around the world. Bound tariff rate and most-favored-nation treatment are two basic principles in WTO law, which should be applied and observed among WTO members. The implementation of “trump tariffs” has resulted in a “trade war between China and other countries”, which undoubtedly constitutes a violation of WTO principles, including violation of bound tariff rates and most-favored-nation treatment. At present, the United States is still one of the major setters of the world’s rules, and its every measure has an impact on the whole world. In addition to opposition from around the world, the trump administration’s move to impose tariffs has been criticized by most local economists and lawyers. To achieve fair and free trade, the trump administration should end the implementation of trump tariffs and fulfill its obligations in global multilateral trade and the WTO.

The tariff measures launched during Donald Trump’s presidency substantially remodeled global trade patterns, with profound impact for India’s economy. This paper examines the impact of these tariffs on India’s export potential, trade balances, and sectoral growth, particularly in steel, pharmaceuticals, textiles, and agriculture. It also explores cascade effects through supply chain disruptions, shifts in bilateral trade relations, and the strategic reform of India’s trade policy. Using trade statistics, policy analysis, and global market trends, the study appraises both short-term and long-term impressions. The findings provide insights into how protectionisms abroad impact emerging economies like India, designing their economic sustainability and resilience measures.

Donald Trump's trade policy, rooted in the principle of "America First," marked a significant break with established multilateral norms. Characterized by using said neo-protectionism, a preference for bilateral negotiations, and aggressive use of tariffs, this technique aimed to reduce exchange deficits and revitalize US manufacturing. These measures had significant repercussions on the worldwide economic system, particularly for developing nations. Increased policy uncertainty, slowing global demand, and the reorientation of world supply chains posed sizable challenges, even though a few countries mockingly benefited from a diversion of exchange flows. In the precise case of Algeria, the direct economic impact of Trump's tariffs was perceived as minimal by the Algerian authorities. This assessment primarily stems from the minimal extent of bilateral change between the two nations, and, crucially, from the exemption of Algeria's most important exports to the US, specifically hydrocarbons, from the imposed tariffs. However, Algeria has undertaken strategic responses including accelerating economic diversification, strengthening regional integration through the AfCFTA, and exploring new export markets in Africa and Asia. This state of affairs highlights the inherent fragility of the multilateral buying and selling machine in the face of such unilateral pressures. It underscores the vital importance for developing countries to undertake adaptive and resilient monetary strategies to navigate an increasingly unpredictable global trading environment.

Last week the Brookings Institution released a report with an astounding – and convincing – conclusion: President Trump's tariff plans are likely to make it more difficult to keep illicit fentanyl off the streets of the United States.

We study media representations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. In particular, we train models of semantic memory on a large number of news media outlets that published online articles during the course of the election. Based on the structure of word co-occurrence in these media outlets, our models learn semantic representations for the two presidential candidates as well as for widely studied personality traits. We find that models trained on media outlets most read by Clinton voters and media outlets most read by Trump voters differ in the strength of association between the two candidates’ names and trait words pertaining to morality. We observe some differences for trait words pertaining to warmth, but none for trait words pertaining to competence.

In March 2018, U.S. President Trump announced that the U.S. would start imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from most exporting countries around the world. This study explores the impact of introducing these tariffs on the equity return of U.S. defense companies. As the defense industry stands among the largest metal consumers in the U.S., it is expected that these import restrictions have deteriorated the business performance of the U.S. defense industry. For this study, a novel trade uncertainty indicator has been constructed that is based on the key events related to the invocation of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. This section empowers the President to impose trade restrictions when the quantity of imports threatens to impair national security. My empirical analysis reveals that investors perceived the introduction of the steel and aluminum tariffs as detrimental to U.S. defense companies. The negative abnormal stock returns in the days around several key tariff-related events evidence this. Already in the period before the Department of Commerce released the findings of its investigation, investors were speculating on the possible introduction of trade barriers. However, the height of the imposed tariff exceeded their expectations since the negative sentiment was further reinforced after the official announcement of the tariff by President Trump.

President Trump’s tariff policies have increased the prices of a wide range of internationally traded goods entering the United States. Contrary to assertions made by the Trump administration, it is very largely the importing country – that is, the United States – that pays the tariffs. The policy has been erratic and subject to frequent changes, adding to uncertainty, as well as reduced trade and risks of increased inflation and macroeconomic instability more generally. The paper examines the impact of the United States’ new trade policy on the WTO, but notes that a series of intractable policy challenges, pre-dating the Trump tariff assault, have plagued the organization for some years. In this context, we identify a loss of negotiating capacity, a growing tendency to rely on preferential trade agreements rather than the WTO to define market access conditions among nations, decision-making stasis, a substantially failed dispute settlement system, and continuing discord among WTO members on the question of entitlement of certain countries to special and differential treatment in response to developmental imperatives. In sum, the destructive consequences of the Trump tariffs and some of the responses to them have further eroded the effectiveness of the WTO, which is already facing significant challenges and is beset by widespread non-compliance. There is an urgent need for governments to come together and reform the WTO if they wish to sustain and benefit from multilateral trade cooperation.

Since the beginning of Trump's first presidency in 2017, his foreign policy has been characterized by scholars and journalists as “transactional.” According to this view, he has prioritized short-term economic gains over promoting principles and has been indifferent to other countries’ political systems when dealing with them. This paper argues, however, that since becoming president in 2025, Trump's foreign policy has shifted from a transactional approach to a tributary one—an attempt to create an international system that harkens back to the historic East Asian international system, when other countries had to come to China's capital and pay tribute to the emperor. This paper shows that Trump's tariffs lack a sound economic logic, and that, in contrast to the indifference that characterizes a transactional foreign policy, Trump's approach has favoured autocratic states over democratic ones. It concludes by suggesting that Canada and other traditional allies need to recognize this tributary nature and stiffen their resistance to Trump.

In the context of the 2018/2019 US–China trade war, the Chinese government responded to President Trump's tariffs by imposing retaliatory tariffs, particularly targeting US agricultural products such as soybeans. This paper employs a novel instrumental variable approach to assess the causal effect of China's retaliatory tariffs on US agricultural exports, both to China and its primary third‐party importers. The analysis reveals that a 10% increase in retaliatory tariffs on a US agricultural export results in approximately a 1.45%–2.14% reduction in exports to China, alongside a 0.36%–0.58% increase in exports to 38 other major importing nations. In monetary terms, these elasticities translate to estimated annual export losses ranging from 6.91 billion USD to 10.19 billion USD in the Chinese market, contrasted with export gains of 5.30 billion USD to 8.54 billion USD in alternative markets. The findings demonstrate a substantial trade deflection effect, wherein the expansion of exports to third‐party markets counterbalances approximately 76.7%–83.8% of the export contraction in the Chinese market.