Unlock the publisher's digest free
Roula Khalaf, editor -in -chief of the FT, selects her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The United Kingdom has a limited power to retaliate against Donald Trump's prices without risking significant economic feedback, according to data that highlights the importance of signing a trade agreement with Washington.
Great Britain is the best buyer of a small number of American products – such as railway cars and wooden barrels – which represent only 0.4% of the total exports of American products, an analysis of the financial times of the commercial data found.
On the other hand, the EU is the main destination of products which represent 35% of American exports.
The figures stress that the United Kingdom does not have the economic lever of the greatest commercial powers, I Summit On May 19, the American president could annoy.
British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said that he intended to conclude an agreement with the United States, but had not excluded retaliation levies, telling business leaders that “nothing is outside the table”.
But economists advise to announce reciprocal prices, even if an agreement cannot be concluded to reduce the 10% rate on British exports to the United States – and 25% on steel, aluminum and cars.
“There is no good reason for economic reasons for reprisals,” said Michael Gasiorek, director of the Center for Inclusive Trade Policy at the University of Sussex.
“America is a much larger market (than the United Kingdom), you are therefore waiting for the balance of dependence to be tilted in favor of America.”
British authorities are facing political pressure to be considered as not “taking down things”, but it was “extremely unlikely” that British reciprocal prices inflict sufficient pain to bring Trump, “he added.
The reprisals “will increase prices, exacerbating the cost of living crisis, which strikes these most difficult worst (the hardest,” said Julian Boys, associate director of the Center for Local Economic Strategies, a reflection group.
The government recently published A list of 8,364 American products potentially at risk, which includes articles such as living eels and human hair alongside traditional targets such as motorcycles and denim.
William Bain, head of trade policy in the British chambers of commerce, said that the United Kingdom should examine where he could ward off the United States supply chains if he decided to retaliate.
The pairing of British exports of American policy, estimated at 8 billion pounds sterling per year, would be a “difficult task,” he said, adding that the reprisals rates should “be only the last appeal”.
The government said the United States was an “essential ally” and that discussions on an economic agreement between the two parties were “underway”.
“We have been clear that a trade war is in anyone's interests and we will continue to adopt a calm and regular approach to talks and aim to find a resolution to help relieve pressure on British companies and consumers,” he added.
America holds the hand of the whip for almost 96% of the goods it exports to the United Kingdom, according to an FT analysis of 2023 trade flows, the last full year of available data.
The analysis compared the relative dependence of British importers on the groups of products arriving from America, with American dependence on the United Kingdom as an export destination.
The scope of the United Kingdom to retaliate is also limited by the strategic importance of goods where it has more leverage, for example, certain critical minerals such as roasted molyben minerals, a key entry into the manufacture of steel.
Great Britain could retaliate by targeting American services, but Gasiorek warned that it was a “nuclear option” because it was likely to trigger countermeasures by the United States-an act of self-manage since the United Kingdom exports the value of services in the United States twice as Vice Versa.
He said the United Kingdom could have an impact by coordinating action with the EU or targeting American companies that could “bend the ear of the Trump administration”, but it would be difficult to find products that do not compromise British national interests.
