Japan’s Prime Minister and President Trump discussed US tariffs recently. They agreed to quickly engage ministers in talks to create a beneficial agreement and shared views on Israel’s actions against Iran. Trump wants to increase tariffs on Japanese cars and other imports, urging Japan to buy more US goods. The challenge arises because Japan is a nation of savers, while the US tends to spend more. Currently, the US has a 25% tariff on foreign cars, which has been in place since April 3, 2025, due to a national security order. Additionally, a 25% tariff on auto parts, including engines and transmissions, started on May 3, 2025. However, components that comply with the USMCA are temporarily exempt from these tariffs. Trump has suggested further raising the 25% auto tariffs to boost manufacturing and investments in the US. This situation highlights increasing tension in trade policy, and the timing is critical. For those watching market-related products influenced by politics, trade decisions based on security concerns can lead to market volatility. When tariffs are imposed under Section 232, it shows that national interests take precedence over international economic cooperation. The higher tariffs on complete vehicles and key auto parts will affect cross-border supply strategies. Foreign carmakers with US production facilities could still make profits, but only if these facilities meet changing domestic content standards. The exemption related to the North American trade agreement seems temporary, and time is running out. In simpler terms, this policy discourages importing and uses costs to push industrial activity back into the country. It shifts the focus from being competitive to being nearby. With tariffs now affecting not just the cars but also their essential parts, the industry faces serious tests. These challenges aren’t just technical; they are also political, strategic, and tied to different national consumption and production styles. Behaviorally, the divide is clear: one economy focuses on saving, while the other emphasizes spending. These differences are fundamental, not fleeting. Trade negotiations influenced by such contrasting foundations involve more than numbers; they require changes in access, methods, and power dynamics. The current situation calls for a close look at trade risks. Sector-specific strategies, especially those related to vehicle trade, may see sharper price changes throughout the day—especially if Trump’s tariff ideas move from casual comments to official decisions. The focus has shifted from “consideration” to strong anticipation, and that’s where adjustments will happen. We can expect that monitoring policies will become more important than data analysis in the coming weeks. The potential impact of new tariffs cannot be dismissed simply because of volatility from recent months. Anyone managing position correlations, especially with yen-related stocks, has seen how trade clarity (or a lack thereof) affects hedging costs and option prices. Another key factor is the risk of policy synchronization. While both sides want to speed up agreements, what truly matters are the terms, not just the speed. When two economies operate on different timelines, moving quickly could cause more friction. We will likely hear more from ministerial talks soon, but market positions should begin anticipating the costs of delays—or the disappointment of expectations that don’t come to pass. Lastly, when economic actions have security implications, the calculations become less reliable on commercial grounds alone. Trade policies affected by military factors are harder to predict and are influenced more by diplomatic issues than by business cycles. And as we know, these diplomatic issues are driven by the news cycle.

here to set up a live account on VT Markets now