Trade experts and industry organizations have warned that the United States US trade pact leaves a multitude of unanswered issues that will have to be resolved through other negotiations.
The agreement covers only five pages of text providing only the outline of an agreement which was brought together in just six weeks after the “Liberation Day” of US President Donald Trump ” price Announcement on April 2.
The document, published Thursday, notes that it “does not constitute a legally liaison agreement” and that the two parties must now start the talks “to develop and formalize” the proposals, which will allow the United Kingdom to escape the worst of the Trump's global tariff regime.
Beef and bioethanol
The White House said that the agreement presented an “an opportunity of $ 5 billion” so that we, the farmers, export to the UNITED KINGDOMBut did not contain details in only two areas: a reciprocal beef quota without a price of 13,000 tonnes, and a United Kingdom promises to suppress its existing levy of 19% on 1.4 billion liters of American ethanol.
The two parties said they “work together” to improve market access for other agricultural products, but did not specify which or on which calendar. The White House noted that the United Kingdom had “unfairly” prices up to 125% by and more than 125% on meat, poultry and dairy products in the United States.
The British agriculture and biofuels sectors said they were still trying to determine whether the quota without a price applied to all ethanol, including for use in fuel, or simply the ethanol used in the production of food and drink.
The National Farmers' Union warned that arable farmers who have sold wheat to biofuels producers could lose a profitable flow of income if the quota applied to fuel. Up to 15% of the British domestic demand from wheat came from biofuels, added the NFU.
The United Kingdom has two biofuels: ENSUS, in Teesside, and Vivergo, in the East Yorkshire, which belongs to the British conglomerate, to the British conglomerate, with associated British foods. ENSUS said the agreement had raised “very important questions” around the viability of manufacturing bioethanol in the United Kingdom and that it was awaiting government details.
The Confederation of Agricultural Industries, which represents the food sector for food for the United Kingdom, said that the abolition of the British rate of 19% on American ethanol “requires greater clarity”.
“The government must examine how it can guarantee that the competitiveness of this sector is maintained,” said Edward Barker, head of AIC policy.
Fixing standards
Commerce experts have also noted that the agreement had raised the question of whether the United Kingdom would recognize organizations of American industry standards as an international standards – a long -standing request for American trade negotiators.
Currently, the United Kingdom is also part of a European regional group of 34 countries which reflects the international system of standards based on the definitions of the World Trade Organization, while the American system is more motivated in trade.
International rules cover a wide range of products and services and how business is carried out, according to Scott Steedman, director general of British Standards Institution standards.
He said that American demand was likely to “blur the waters” around the UK's commitment to international standards governance structures.
Peter Holmes, a member of the United Kingdom Trade Policy Observatory at Sussex University, added that if the agreement has not initiated the United Kingdom to reduce standards, it risked the United Kingdom diverge from its current position in Europe, which makes the UE-UK “reset”.
“The United Kingdom must be very careful to actually negotiate an agreement which could weaken consumer protection, or which makes us diverge from the EU position on standards and regulations,” he said.
Drugs
Observers in the medication industry say that the US-UK agreement leaves many crucial questions, including the priced rates, the security chain security rules and intellectual property, and British policy towards the sector.
The PACT promises to offer the “significantly preferential” treatment of the United Kingdom if and when Washington requires prices to pharmaceutical products, which are the subject of a so-called article 232 survey as to whether the prices should be applied in terms of national security.
The probe, which will end by the end of the year, presents itself in the context of the increase in American concerns concerning dependence on China for critical products. China is a large global source of active pharmaceutical ingredients (API), which are crucial components of drugs.
Another uncertainty concerns a British commitment to “strive to improve the overall environment of pharmaceutical companies operating in the United Kingdom”.
The industry is already in talks with the British government on the prices paid by the National Health Service for Drugs.
Richard Torbett, director general of the association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry Lobby Group, said that the taxation of prices would make it more difficult to maintain the resilience of the supply chain and ensure that patients in the two countries have access to drugs and vaccines they need.
“Although this initial agreement is only a first step for pharmaceutical products, we remain convinced that a favorable result is remaining possible and in the interest of the two countries,” he added.
Steel and aluminum
Steel and aluminum manufacturers had trouble understanding the impact on their business after the document does not explicitly confirm the “zero rate” agreement announced by British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on Thursday.
UK Steel, the main lobby in the industry, said that uncertainty already affected certain sales while customers do not retain orders in the hope that details would become clearer in the coming weeks.
There were still questions about the conditions that must be met in order to respond to the concerns of Washington On the pressing of China Outside the supply chains for strategically vital materials.
“The terms of the agreement highlight a number of hoops to jump before the British steel sector can see the advantages of this agreement,” added UK Steel. “To fully assess the impact on our sector, we will have to understand the conditions of the supply chain which must be met, how the quotas will be defined and when these take effect.”
A senior British official said that the agreement would lead to the majority of British steel exports to the United States attracting a zero rate, although certain specific categories of steel would always carry out up to 3%. “The maximum is 3%, but most will be zero prices,” they added.
Noble Francis, Director of the Construction Economy Products Association, said that it was not clear if the covered steel agreement used in derivative products such as vehicle parts, industrial components and household items that were initially included in Trump announcements by 25% in March.
“It is essential that companies have a clarity on this subject as soon as possible because it could have a major impact on their exports to the United States,” he added.
Aerospace
On Friday, the leaders of the aerospace said that there was still uncertainty about the details of the commercial conditions of the sector, even if the officials insisted that “all the British aerospace parties” were without a price.
There was “no mention” of the aerospace in the British government's official documents project, said one, adding that companies were still waiting for confirmation in writing before publicly hosting the trade agreement with the United States.
The leaders also said that, taking into account the integrated nature of the supply chain, they were trying to determine whether the “all aerospace” parties from different countries would be exempt from prices, or simply those from the United Kingdom.
The industry on both sides of the Atlantic must see a price of 0% applied to the parts of the aircraft – it has been essential for air security for almost half a century, “said Kevin Craven, director general of commercial group announcements. The industry asked that this was confirmed” as soon as possible “.
There is also an uncertainty about what the agreement means for Military Aerospace, such as the F-35 Fighter Jet program led by the American defense group Lockheed Martin. Great Britain is the only level 1 partner in the United States for the F-35, British companies contributing around 15% of the value of each plane.
Lockheed, as an importer of parts in the United States, assured the burden of prices, according to analysts. Several crucial parts are delivered first to Lockheed Martin in the United Kingdom before being shipped to the United States, according to people familiar with the situation.
The White House said that the agreement with the United Kingdom “maximizes competitiveness and secures the supply chain for American aerospace manufacturers thanks to preferential access to high quality British aerospace components”.
