On Friday, May 23, Donald Trump surprised many by announcing a possible 25% increase in tariffs. Indeed, this increase would affect iPhones manufactured outside the United States. This stance, published on Truth Social, directly targets Apple, an iconic company of American technological power. In response, Apple’s stock price fell by 2.5% in pre-market trading.
Trump claims to have informed Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, of this demand. According to him, iPhones sold in the United States must be assembled in the U.S., not in India or elsewhere. This announcement is accompanied by an explicit threat: imposing 50% tariffs on European imports starting June 1. The former president accuses the European Union of unfair trade practices against American interests.
A populist and calculated electoral tactic
These threats are not solely about trade policy. They follow a clear electoral logic. In the midst of the 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump seeks to win back industrial America. He addresses a working class weakened by globalization and undecided voters in strategic Midwestern states.
By targeting Apple, he makes an American multinational the symbol of a globalized economy he deems failing. The brand embodies both innovation and critical dependence on Asian supply chains. By contrasting this situation with an ideal of "made in USA" iPhones, Trump fuels an appealing but challenging sovereign narrative that would be difficult to achieve without disrupting the entire tech sector.
Questionable legal foundations
Trump is considering invoking Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act or Section 301 of the Trade Act, as he did during his first term. These instruments impose tariffs for national security reasons. Additionally, they respond to trade practices deemed unfair.
However, these measures raise serious legal objections within the WTO. They would notably violate the most-favored-nation clause, which requires fair treatment for all members. Moreover, they would oblige Washington to offer trade compensations. Finally, no American legal provision allows targeting a specific company like Apple, except under exceptional justification.
Europe and China ready for battle
The European Union quickly reacted to Trump’s statements. Brussels mentioned the implementation of countermeasures targeting American financial and digital sectors. Indeed, the U.S. has structural surpluses in these sectors. China, for its part, has already demonstrated its retaliatory capacity between 2018 and 2019, notably by hitting American agricultural exports, a key electoral base for Trump.
These retaliations could cause a boomerang effect for the American economy. Companies dependent on imported components or international markets would be particularly vulnerable. In the long run, this type of strategy could weaken the overall competitiveness of the United States on the global stage.
A trade policy with contested effectiveness
Tariffs do not address the root causes of the American trade deficit. It results more from a macroeconomic imbalance between domestic consumption, savings rates, and public deficit. Despite the tariff increases implemented between 2016 and 2020, the deficit continued to grow. Consequently, it reached $1.2 trillion in 2024, a historic record.
Furthermore, this approach increases economic uncertainty. Companies hesitate to invest in the face of shifting trade rules. International partners doubt the legal and diplomatic stability of the United States. As a result, this undermines their negotiating capacity in multilateral forums like the WTO or the G20.
Apple facing industrial blackmail
Today, the majority of iPhones destined for the American market are produced in India. Indeed, this is part of a post-COVID diversification strategy. However, components still largely come from Asian suppliers. A 25% tariff on these phones would harm Apple, distributors, and American consumers. Moreover, it would not create significant jobs in the United States.
Additionally, such a measure could fuel inflation, already under the watch of the Federal Reserve. The final effect could be a general increase in the cost of technological products, exacerbating tensions on purchasing power.
A difficult transatlantic dispute to manage
The trade dispute between the United States and the European Union is not new. Trump accuses Europe of benefiting from privileged access to the American market. However, the data is controversial. The bilateral trade deficit is estimated at $235 billion by the USTR, but only €150 billion according to the European Commission.
In reality, American services – particularly in financial, legal, and digital fields – generate a surplus with the EU. In case of escalation, Brussels could target sensitive sectors like cloud computing, digital platforms, or banking services. But divisions among member states make a quick and coordinated response difficult.
High-risk economic diplomacy
At its core, Donald Trump uses tariffs as a political negotiation lever. He hopes to obtain trade concessions without triggering an open war. However, his method relies on fragile legal grounds, an unconvincing economic strategy, and an unpredictable diplomatic stance.
This transactional style has already weakened the American position in international negotiations. It fuels distrust among traditional allies. Moreover, it provides fertile ground for the rise of rivals like China or India.
A vision of trade against the current
Most developed economies rely on multilateral agreements. However, Trump continues to advocate a protectionist and unilateral vision of global trade. This approach might appeal to an electoral base nostalgic for a bygone era. But it also risks isolating the United States, to the detriment of its influence and future prosperity.