NEW YORK — Just over three months ago, President Donald Trump unveiled his most sweeping volley of tariffs yet — holding up large charts from the White House Rose Garden to outline new import taxes that the U.S. would soon slap on goods from nearly every country in the world.

Related Articles

Debate erupts over role job cuts played in weather forecasts ahead of deadly Texas floods

Trump to put 25% tariffs on allies Japan and South Korea

Trump administration’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus activists faces federal trial

Trump and Netanyahu may take a victory lap on Iran, but the Gaza war looms over their meeting

Pressure from Trump for trade deals before Wednesday deadline, but hints of more time for talks

But in line with much of Trump’s on-again, off-again trade policy playbook, the bulk of those “Liberation Day” levies in April were postponed just hours after they took effect — in a 90-day suspension that arrived in an apparent effort to quell global market panic and facilitate country-by-country negotiations. At that time, the administration set a lofty goal of reaching 90 trade deals in 90 days.

Now, with the July 9 deadline looming, the U.S. has only announced pacts with the United Kingdom and Vietnam — as well as a “framework″ agreement with China in a separate trade dispute. News of these deals often trickled through social media posts from the president and, even when countries on both sides of a negotiation table made more official announcements, many key details — including timing — were sparse.

The Trump administration has since hinted that some trading partners might get more time for talks. Over the July 4th holiday weekend, Trump said that the U.S. would start sending letters to certain countries warning that higher tariffs could kick in Aug. 1. Trump took to Truth Social on Monday to share letters he sent to the leaders of Japan and South Korea, declaring that both countries would see 25% tariffs on goods entering the U.S. starting Aug. 1.

Even with negotiations ongoing, most countries have still faced a minimum 10% levy on goods entering the U.S. over the past three months, on top of punishing new taxes targeting foreign steel and aluminum as well as auto imports. The 90-day pause pushed back additional steeper rates, which Trump calls “reciprocal” tariffs, for dozens of nations.

Here’s what we know about the trade deals announced since April.

Vietnam

On July 2, Trump announced a trade deal with Vietnam that he said would allow U.S. goods to enter the country duty-free. Vietnamese exports to the United States, by contrast, would face a 20% levy.

That’s less than half the 46% “reciprocal” rate Trump proposed for Vietnamese goods back in April. But in addition to the new 20% tariff rate, Trump said the U.S. would impose a 40% tax on “transshipping’’ — targeting goods from another country that stop in Vietnam on their way to the United States. Washington complains that Chinese goods have been dodging higher U.S. tariffs by transiting through Vietnam.

It wasn’t immediately clear when these new rates would go into effect or whether they would come on top of any other previously-imposed levies. Like most other countries, Vietnam has faced Trump’s 10% baseline tariff for the last three months.

United Kingdom

On May 8, Trump agreed to cut tariffs on British autos, steel and aluminum, among other trade pledges — while the U.K. promised to reduce levies on U.S. products like olive oil, wine and sports equipment. The deal was announced in grandiose terms by both countries, but some key details remained unknown for weeks.

When the deal was announced, for example, the British government notably said that the U.S. agreed to exempt the U.K. from its then-universal 25% duties on foreign steel and aluminum — which would have effectively allowed both metals from the country to come into the U.S. duty-free.

But the timing for when those cuts would actually take effect stayed up in the air for almost a month. It wasn’t until early June, when Trump hiked his steel and aluminum tariffs to a punishing 50% worldwide, that the U.S. acknowledged it was time to implement the agreement. And even then, U.S. tariffs on British steel and aluminum did not go to zero. The U.K. was the only country spared from Trump’s new 50% levies, but still faces 25% import taxes on the metals — and Trump said that rate could also go up on or after Wednesday.

The U.K. did not receive a higher “reciprocal” rate on April 2, but continues to face the 10% baseline tax.

China

At its peak, Trump’s new tariffs on Chinese goods totaled 145% — and China’s countertariffs on American products reached 125%. But on May 12, the countries agreed to their own 90-day truce to roll back those levies to 30% and 10%, respectively. And last month, details began trickling in about a tentative trade agreement.

On June 11, following talks in London, Trump announced a “framework” for a deal. And late last month, the U.S. and China both acknowledged that some sort of agreement had been reached. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that China had agreed to make it easier for American firms to acquire Chinese magnets and rare earth minerals critical for manufacturing and microchip production. Meanwhile, without explicitly mentioning U.S. access to rare earths, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said that it would “review and approve eligible export applications for controlled items” and that the U.S. would “lift a series of restrictive measures it had imposed on China.”

More specifics about those measures — and when they would actually go into effect — were not immediately clear. But on Friday, the Ministry of Commerce acknowledged that the U.S. was resuming exports of airplane parts, ethane and other items to China. And when Trump first announced the framework on June 11, the U.S. had said it agreed to stop seeking to revoke the visas of Chinese students on U.S. college campuses.

AP Reporters Aniruddha Ghosal in Hanoi, Paul Wiseman and Fu Ting in Washington, D.C., and Huizhong Wu in Bangkok contributed to this report.

By JOSH BOAK

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Monday placed a 25% tax on goods imported from Japan and South Korea, citing persistent trade imbalances with the two crucial U.S. allies in Asia.

Related Articles

Wall Street moves lower as Trump’s tariff deadline nears

Business People: New Brighton Mayor Kari Niedfeldt-Thomas to lead regional BBB

Real World Economics: Looming farm crisis, by the numbers

Your Money: The pursuit of happiness

Working Strategies: Random thoughts: ‘Office,’ not ‘work;’ on-the-job training

Trump provided notice of the tariffs to begin on Aug. 1 by posting letters on Truth Social that were addressed to the leaders of both countries. The letters warned both countries to not retaliate by increasing their own import taxes, or else the Trump administration would further increase tariffs.

“If for any reason you decide to raise your Tariffs, then, whatever the number you choose to raise them by, will be added onto the 25% that we charge,” Trump wrote in the letters to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and South Korean President Lee Jae-myung.

The letters were not the final word from Trump on tariffs, so much as another episode in a global economic drama in which the U.S. president has placed himself at the center.

Trump has declared an economic emergency to unilaterally impose the taxes, suggesting they are remedies for past trade deficits even though many U.S. consumers have come to value autos, electronics and other goods from Japan and South Korea. But it’s unclear what he gains strategically against China — another stated reason for the tariffs — by challenging two crucial partners in Asia who could counter China’s economic heft.

“These tariffs may be modified, upward or downward, depending on our relationship with your Country,” Trump wrote in both letters.

Because the new tariff rates go into effect in roughly three weeks, Trump is setting up a period of possibly tempestuous talks among the U.S. and its trade partners to reach new frameworks.

Trump initially sparked hysteria in the financial markets by announcing tariff rates on dozens of countries, including 24% on Japan and 25% on South Korea. In order to calm the markets, Trump unveiled a 90-day negotiating period during which goods from most countries were taxed at a baseline 10%.

The 90-day negotiating period technically ends before Wednesday, even as multiple administration officials and Trump himself suggested the three-week period before implementation is akin to overtime for additional talks.

Trump is relying on tariff revenues to help offset the tax cuts he signed into law on July 4, a move that could shift a greater share of the federal tax burden onto the middle class and poor as importers would pass along much of the cost of the tariffs.

His trade framework with Vietnam is clearly designed to box out China from routing its America-bound goods through that country, while the quotas in the United Kingdom framework would spare that nation from the higher tariff rates being charged on steel, aluminum and autos.

The United States ran a $69.4 billion trade imbalance in goods with Japan in 2024 and a $66 billion imbalance with South Korea, according to the Census Bureau.

By MICHAEL CASEY

BOSTON (AP) — A federal bench trial begins Monday over a lawsuit that challenges a Trump administration campaign of arresting and deporting faculty and students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations and other political activities.

The lawsuit, filed by several university associations against President Donald Trump and members of his administration, would be one of the first to go to trial. Plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge William Young to rule the policy violates the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, a law governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations.

“The policy’s effects have been swift. Noncitizen students and faculty across the United States have been terrified into silence,” the plaintiffs wrote in their pretrial brief.

“Students and faculty are avoiding political protests, purging their social media, and withdrawing from public engagement with groups associated with pro-Palestinian viewpoints,” they wrote. “They’re abstaining from certain public writing and scholarship they would otherwise have pursued. They’re even self-censoring in the classroom.”

Several scholars are expected to testify how the policy and subsequent arrests have prompted them to abandon their activism for Palestinian human rights and criticizing Israeli government’s policies.

Since Trump took office, the U.S. government has used its immigration enforcement powers to crack down on international students and scholars at several American universities.

Trump and other officials have accused protesters and others of being “pro-Hamas,” referring to the Palestinian militant group that attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Many protesters have said they were speaking out against Israel’s actions in the war.

Plaintiffs single out several activists by name, including Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who was released last month after spending 104 days in federal immigration detention. Khalil has become a symbol of Trump ’s clampdown on campus protests.

The lawsuit also references Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was released in May from a Louisiana immigration detention. She spent six weeks in detention after she was arrested walking on the street of a Boston suburb. She claims she was illegally detained following an op-ed she co-wrote last year that criticized the school’s response to Israel’s war in Gaza.

The plaintiffs also accuse the Trump administration of supplying names to universities who they wanted to target, launching a social media surveillance program and used Trump’s own words in which he said after Khalil’s arrest that his was the “first arrest of many to come.”

The government argued in court documents that the plaintiffs are bringing a First Amendment challenge to a policy “of their own creation.”

Related Articles

Trump to put 25% tariffs on allies Japan and South Korea

Trump and Netanyahu may take a victory lap on Iran, but the Gaza war looms over their meeting

Pressure from Trump for trade deals before Wednesday deadline, but hints of more time for talks

Musk says he’s forming a new political party after split with Trump over tax cuts law

Battles over public lands loom even after sell-off proposal fails

“They do not try to locate this program in any statute, regulation, rule, or directive. They do not allege that it is written down anywhere. And they do not even try to identify its specific terms and substance,” the government argues. “That is all unsurprising, because no such policy exists.”

They argue the plaintiffs case also rest on a “misunderstanding of the First Amendment, ”which under binding Supreme Court precedent applies differently in the immigration context than it otherwise does domestically.”

But plaintiffs counter that evidence at the trial will show the Trump administration has implemented the policy a variety of ways, including issuing formal guidance on revoking visas and green cards and establishing a process for identifying those involved in pro-Palestinian protests.

“Defendants have described their policy, defended it, and taken political credit for it,” plaintiffs wrote. “It is only now that the policy has been challenged that they say, incredibly, that the policy does not actually exist. But the evidence at trial will show that the policy’s existence is beyond cavil.”

By TOM MURPHY, AP Health Writer

Prices are falling for the popular obesity treatments Wegovy and Zepbound, but steady access to the drugs remains challenging.

The medications still amount to around $500 per month for those without insurance — out of reach for many patients. And even for people with insurance, coverage remains uneven.

“The medications should be available, the question is at what price and can people sustain that,” said Matt Maciejewski, a Duke University professor who studies obesity treatment coverage.

Doctors say the situation forces them to get creative in treating patients, but there’s hope that prices may fall more in the future.

The drugs are still in high demand

Wegovy and Zepbound are part of a wave of obesity medications known as GLP-1 receptor agonists that have soared in popularity.

Zepbound brought in $2.3 billion in U.S. sales during this year’s first quarter, making it one of drugmaker Eli Lilly’s best sellers.

Novo Nordisk says Wegovy has about 200,000 weekly prescriptions in the U.S., where it brought in nearly $1.9 billion in first-quarter sales.

Insurance coverage is increasing — for some

The benefits consultant Mercer says more businesses with 500 or more employees are adding coverage of the injected drugs for their workers and family members.

And Novo says 85% of its patients who have coverage in the U.S. pay $25 or less per month.

Plus some patients with diabetes can get coverage of the GLP-1 drugs Ozempic and Mounjaro from Novo and Lilly that are approved to treat that condition.

But most state and federally funded Medicaid programs don’t cover the drugs for obesity and neither does Medicare, the federal program mainly for people age 65 and older.

Even the plans that cover the drugs often pay only a portion of the bill, exposing patients to hundreds of dollars in monthly costs, said Dr. Beverly Tchang.

Drugmakers offer help with these out-of-pocket costs, but that assistance can be limited.

“Coverage is not the same as access,” said Tchang, a New York-based doctor who serves as a paid advisor to both Novo and Lilly.

But coverage remains inconsistent

Bill-payers like employers are nervous about drugs that might be used by a lot of people indefinitely.

Some big employers have dropped coverage of the drugs due to the expense. Pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, also are starting to pick one brand over the other as they negotiate deals with the drugmakers.

One of the nation’s largest PBMs, run by CVS Health, dropped Zepbound from its national formulary, or list of covered drugs, on July 1 in favor of Wegovy.

That forced Tchang to figure out another treatment plan for several patients, many of whom took Zepbound because it made them less nauseous.

Dr. Courtney Younglove’s office sends prospective patients a video link showing them how to check their insurer’s website for coverage of the drugs before they visit.

“Then some of them just cancel their appointment because they don’t have coverage,” the Overland Park, Kansas, doctor said.

Cheaper compounded drugs are still being sold

Compounding pharmacies and other entities were allowed to make off-brand, cheaper copies of Wegovy and Zepbound when there was a shortage of the drugs. But the U.S. Food and Drug Administration determined earlier this year that the shortage had ended.

That should have ended the compounded versions, but there is an exception: Some compounding is permitted when a drug is personalized for the patient.

The health care company Hims & Hers Health offers compounded doses of semaglutide, the drug behind Wegovy, that adjust dose levels to help patients manage side effects. Hims says these plans start at $165 a month for 12 months, with customers paying in full upfront.

It’s a contentious issue. Eli Lilly has sued pharmacies and telehealth companies trying to stop them from selling compounded versions of its products.

Novo recently ended a short-lived partnership with Hims to sell Wegovy because the telehealth company continued compounding. Novo says the compounded versions of its drug put patient safety at risk because ingredients are made by foreign suppliers not monitored by US regulators.

Hims says it checks all ingredients to make sure they meet U.S. quality and safety standards. It also uses a third-party lab to verify that a drug’s strength is accurately labeled.

Prices have dropped

Both drugmakers are selling most of their doses for around $500 a month to people without insurance, a few hundred dollars less than some initial prices.

Even so, that expense would eat up about 14% of the average annual per person income in the U.S., which is around $43,000.

Related Articles

American kids have become increasingly unhealthy over nearly two decades, new study finds

How to protect yourself from ticks year-round

Essentia hospital nurses in Duluth, Superior avoid strike

Thinking about taking a stab at IV therapy? Ask some questions first

Burns and fireworks injuries: What to do when seconds count this July 4th

There are some factors that may suppress prices over time. Both companies are developing pill versions of their treatments. Those could hit the market in the next year or so, which might drive down prices for the older, injectable doses.

Younglove said some of her patients save as much as 15% by getting their doses shipped from a pharmacy in Canada. They used to get them from an Israeli pharmacy until the Canadians dropped their prices.

She says competition like this, plus the introduction of pill versions, will pressure U.S. prices.

“I think price wars are going to drive it down,” she said. “I think we are in the early stages. I have hope.”

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.