Free Trade with MERCOSUR: An attractive opportunity for the UK?

After a negotiation process characterised by long periods of stagnations and disagreements[1], on the 17th of January, a Partnership Agreement was signed between the European Union and the four founding members of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR, as known in Spanish): Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay[2]. This free trade agreement is meant to eliminate tariffs on 91% of EU exports to the South American bloc. This will be done over a 15-year phase-in period, paired with the removal of duties on 92% of MERCOSUR goods sold to the EU, within a 10-year timeframe. There is uncertainty regarding the ratification and implementation of this deal, due to a recent decision by the European Parliament to refer the agreement to the EU Court of Justice. Nevertheless, the economic size of the parties involved (estimated at 18% of the world’s GDP), along with the current context in which traditional large trading partners are becoming less reliable, has generated global interest. Such deal could constitute an example for other economies seeking to secure free trade with like-minded partners. It would allow them to diversify their trade portfolio and diminish their dependence on potentially problematic counterparts. If the deal goes ahead, EU exporters will secure [...]

By |2026-03-03T15:21:34+00:003 March 2026|Blog, International Trade, UK - Non EU|0 Comments
Read More

Making trade work for development: Early signs suggest UK’s new trade scheme is working

In the global debate about tariffs, one thing is clear: trade can be critical to making economies grow and societies more resilient. As part of its commitment to international development, the United Kingdom introduced the Developing Countries Trading Scheme (DCTS) in 2023 to make it easier and cheaper for developing countries to export to the UK. The objective is to stimulate trade from beneficiary countries, promote growth, support economic transformation and help reduce poverty. Now, after two years, the UK government has commissioned independent research to determine if the new trading scheme is indeed encouraging more trade and how it can benefit people in developing countries. Positive early findings The research by the UK’s new Trade and Development, Evidence and Innovation Programme (E&I) has found early, positive signs that the DCTS is succeeding in encouraging developing countries to make greater use of trade preferences. Through the DCTS, which is offered unilaterally by the UK, 65 developing countries can benefit from lower tariffs than countries that are outside the scheme and cannot use other UK trade agreements. So the DCTS can make the goods imported from member countries more competitive. But lower tariffs (or trade preferences) are subject to conditions, which [...]

By , |2026-03-03T10:47:13+00:0027 February 2026|Blog, Trade and Development, Evidence & Innovation Programme (E&I).|0 Comments
Read More

A beginner’s guide to economic security: What it means for trade

The return of President Trump to the White House has brought renewed attention to the relationship between trade and national security. This situation raises questions about how governments should respond to increasing pressure to protect economic security while upholding an open and rules-based trading system. What is economic security? The concept of economic security has evolved over the years, reflecting shifting global and domestic circumstances since the end of World War II. Different governments frame economic security risks and threats in various ways, which means there is no universally accepted definition. However, in terms of values, it broadly refers to the absence of a threat of severe deprivation of economic welfare. Rather than providing a single, rigid definition, the EU and Japan have adopted a principle-based approach. This allows them to remain responsive to the risks generated by a rapidly evolving economic, technological, and geopolitical landscape. For example, Japan has established three core principles of economic security: self-sufficiency, indispensability, and safeguarding the rules-based international system. In terms of the instruments, it refers to a nation’s framework to maintain national autonomy and economic resilience against risks and threats. This includes strategies and policies that aim to protect fundamental economic functions, strategic [...]

By |2026-01-07T08:57:01+00:007 January 2026|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

The EU–US Trade Deal: A $750 billion commitment caught between supply security and climate strategy

On 27 July 2025, the European Union (EU) announced a trade deal with the United States (US), averting a potential 30% tariff escalation.[1] Failure to conclude negotiations risked a transatlantic economic relationship valued at $2 trillion annually, which is nearly 6% of global trade in goods and services.[2]  In addition to tariffs, there is also agreement on EU purchases of energy products, and to work together on economic security, access to critical energy and investment facilitation.  This blog examines some of the implications of this announcement, reflecting how it could shift the EU's key trade relationships in energy and influence its progress toward achieving climate goals. The terms of the deal The deal sets a 15% base tariff on most EU exports to the US, effectively halving the previously threatened tariff rate. The agreed 15% baseline tariff is understood to be applied on an inclusive basis and not as an additive layer to pre-existing rates. Both sides appear to have agreed on zero-for-zero tariffs for a number of strategic products. This includes all aircraft and component parts, certain chemicals, certain generics, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, natural resources, and critical raw materials. Officials also confirmed that work will continue to [...]

By , |2025-08-12T15:52:38+01:0012 August 2025|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

Chasing Windmills: Trump’s Brazil tariffs and the Latin American ‘backyard illusion’

On 30 July, President Trump issued an executive order raising tariffs on Brazilian goods by 40%, totalling 50% when added to the 10% baseline announced in April. Invoking emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and the National Emergencies Act (NEA), the justification wasn’t an economic threat, but Brazil’s domestic legal actions, particularly Supreme Court measures against the spread of misinformation in social media platforms and the trial of former president Jair Bolsonaro, accused of undermining Brazilian democracy. This represents economic coercion, violating the principle of non-intervention, which prohibits interference in the domestic affairs of sovereign states, and WTO rules. The blog focuses on how these trade tariffs are a tool to achieve geopolitical goals in the pursuit of hegemonic leadership. The executive order targeting Brazil breaches US obligations in the GATT: Article II:1(b), which binds it to agreed maximum tariff rates, and Article I:1 (most-favoured-nation treatment), which requires equal treatment of all WTO members. It doesn’t meet the requirements of a national security exception under Article XXI as interpreted by WTO jurisprudence. The measure also breaches Article 23 of the DSU, which prohibits unilateral trade retaliation. More than violating such commitments, the US administration is subverting [...]

By |2026-03-04T14:50:27+00:001 August 2025|Blog, UK - Non EU|0 Comments
Read More

Trump’s trade deals: It’s not 1931, yet.

  The overall impact of Trump's actions may only represent a modest shock to the rest of the world, primarily because the US budget and trade balances are likely to widen due to the fiscal stance, which will boost US demand relative to output. However, there could be significantly different relative impacts on other countries. Ultimately, the final outcome will depend on whether the rest of the world magnifies or dampens these effects. The spate of recent “trade deals” done by the US does not stabilise the world trade system; rather, it creates ongoing uncertainty. It’s not like 1931 when the Smoot-Hawley tariffs dramatically increased tariffs on all suppliers across the board simultaneously as US aggregate demand was collapsing, sending a huge macro-economic shock across the world. The US was the world’s biggest importer, and other countries worsened the situation by raising protectionist barriers against one another, e.g. the UK Tariff Act of 1932. Even though the new Trump tariffs are nearly as high as those of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, the US accounts for only about 15% of world imports. At the same time, Trump is cutting taxes (on the rich) in a manner that is very likely to [...]

By |2025-08-01T13:03:23+01:0030 July 2025|Blog, International Trade, UK- EU|0 Comments
Read More

A few important steps forward: the UK-EU strategic partnership

The current UK Government is focused on delivering economic growth and positioning the UK as an important economic and diplomatic player internationally. The relationship with the EU is probably the most crucial bit in this jigsaw, and the deal struck on Monday, outlined in a “Common Understanding”, indicates the direction of travel: cautiously and selectively rebuilding closer relations with the EU along a number of dimensions, first and foremost on security and defence matters, but also including energy, environmental, and some economic aspects. We will discuss three particular areas that are related to trade in the ‘common understanding’: fisheries and trade in agri-food products, youth mobility, and cooperation on energy markets and carbon emissions, respectively.  We explain why the deal delivers in two out of three areas.  More could have been done, and with firmer commitments.  The document essentially represents a negotiating agenda with mostly aspirational language, whereby the two parties agree to “work towards” certain outcomes and everything has to be finally negotiated.  Yet every journey starts with a single step, and the one taken on Monday is a sensible step in the right direction. Fish and food: Significant departures from Brexit A core, perhaps the main, EU demand [...]

By , , , , |2025-05-21T18:45:18+01:0021 May 2025|Blog, International Trade, UK- EU|0 Comments
Read More

The UK-US ‘geopolitical’ deal: A dangerous precedent for the UK and the world

We are living in a geopolitical world. While states may cloak their actions in legal justifications or economic reasoning, trade has become a tool to assert power, control narratives, and forge alliances. Trade deals are being designed to reduce vulnerabilities, not barriers. The recently announced US-UK deal is not a traditional trade agreement but a ‘geopolitical’ deal strongly reflecting the US’s geopolitical rivalry against China. Lacking the legally binding nature of international agreements, the deal sidesteps legal frameworks and instead stakes its importance on strategic alignment. As such, it signals a broader shift in how the US, which has its global leadership threatened by the rise of China as a superpower, now uses trade policy: not as a matter of market efficiency or legal commitments, but as an instrument of geopolitical influence and national security. Furthermore, the deal clearly shows the second Trump administration’s strong intention to force trade partners to collude with the US to squeeze China from global supply chains. Securitising supply chains At face value, the deal includes a few economic concessions, conditional on fulfilling security-related requirements. For example, the US has agreed to reduce tariffs on British steel, aluminium, and automobiles. In return, the UK will [...]

By , |2025-05-14T09:49:44+01:0014 May 2025|Blog, International Trade, UK - Non EU|0 Comments
Read More

Stroking a bear to get half a sandwich

The UK and the US announced the first bilateral post-Reciprocal Tariffs deal on 8 May, named the 'U.S.-UK Economic Prosperity Deal' (henceforth the US-UK EPD). The document published yesterday draws out the contours of this EPD, alongside some concrete initial proposals for reciprocal preferential market access for selected goods. Notwithstanding the negotiations starting immediately, this arrangement can be called off at any time, simply by the two parties giving each other written notice. Besides its symbolic and diplomatic relevance, what is the value of this emerging deal for the UK? This is not a Free Trade Agreement. At first glance, it looks like a quid-pro-quo “mini-deal” of limited economic relevance that the US strong-armed the UK into accepting under the threat of tariffs. The UK is getting some respite from Trump’s tariffs in the (important) car and the (strategic) steel and aluminium sectors, in exchange for lowering tariffs on some agricultural products such as ethanol and beef, the latter on a reciprocal basis. But a closer reading of the ‘General Terms document’ suggests that it is more than this, and a lot worse. First, as stated on page 1 of the text, the arrangement that the US and the UK [...]

By , , , , |2025-05-09T18:57:18+01:009 May 2025|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

Bridge over the River Kwai or Road to Nowhere?

It is not often that there’s a genuinely new idea around in trade policy, but lo and behold, here’s one: a tariff on a service.  US President Trump is considering a 100% charge on films made abroad. Spielberg would call it a close encounter of the third kind. Although the charge would apply in principle to any foreign-made film, it could hit the UK film sector, part of its successful creative industries, particularly hard, turning it into the English Patient if the idea gained traction. But how could it even work? Since services are intangible and non-storable, suppliers and consumers of services somehow need to come together for a service to ‘change hands.’  Internationally, this can happen in a variety of ways. For instance, the service may be delivered digitally via the Internet, as indeed it would be the case for a movie or an architectural blueprint.  The consumer could travel abroad to enjoy a service (e.g. tourism), or firms could set up affiliates abroad to sell their services to local consumers (anyone who hasn’t done their groceries at Lidl or Aldi?).  Lastly, a service supplier who is a natural person, such as a movie director, could travel to another [...]

By |2025-05-07T15:58:32+01:007 May 2025|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

Our home

University of Sussex Logo

© 2024 UK Trade Policy Observatory

Site by: Phipps Design

Go to Top