How Will U.S.'s Tariff Threats Impact the World?

This month, I saw on the news that the U.S. has announced to raise tariffs on South Korean imports from 15% to 25%. At first, I thought this was just an issue between South Korea and the U.S., but I read related articles that said the U.S. has also raised tariffs for Canada and other European countries. I can understand the U.S. using tariffs to protect its own industries, but recently it seemed as if they were being used as a tool in negotiations with other countries. This made me wonder how these tariff threats benefit the U.S. and how they impact America’s trade relations with other countries.

According to AP News, President Trump announced plans to raise tariffs on South Korean products like vehicles, lumber, and medicine from 15 to 25 percent on January 26, 2026. The U.S. cited the fact that the South Korean National Assembly has not yet passed legislation on previously agreed-upon trade agreements and investment commitments. From the U.S.’s perspective, it may want to implement agreed-upon agreements as soon as possible, but since South Korea also has its own legislative procedures, it may not be possible to follow the U.S.’s desired timeline. What interested me about this situation was the fact that even between close allies, such conflict of economic interests can occur.

Similar situations happened in other countries. According to Reuters, the U.S. warned Canada that tariffs on Canadian goods would increase by 100% if it pursued a trade agreement with China. The Canadian government explained that it was not pursuing a comprehensive free trade agreement with China. Meanwhile, The Guardian covered the situation in which the U.S. warned eight European countries of additional tariffs on the Greenland issue, only to retract it a few days later. What interested me about this case was how the U.S. was using tariffs for different issues. The U.S. used tariffs to demand implementation of trade agreements in Korea, to highlight issues with Canada’s trade relations with China, and to warn European countries in diplomatic conflicts.

Figure 1. A sign advising that products from the U.S. affected by a tariff will be marked with a symbol at the shelf. Photo by Margarita Young. 

I agree that tariffs can be an effective tool in negotiations. If countries with large markets like the U.S. warn of higher tariffs, then other countries won’t be able to ignore them. However, if this happens repeatedly, I think problems will arise in the long term. Companies spend months or even years to build factories or export products. But if there is a sudden announcement that tariffs will increase, companies will have to review investment costs and plans all over again before starting. Even if threats to raise tariffs benefit the U.S. in negotiations, the uncertainty that is produced in the process could burden companies trading with the country.

Another thing I wondered was: If such pressure from tariffs is repeated, to what extent would other countries rely on trade with the U.S.? Although countries such as Korea and Canada have cooperated with the U.S. economically, if they face similar threats on tariffs in the future, then they would look for other markets or diversify their trade relationship. Of course, the U.S. is so large that reducing their dependence on it will not be easy. But they will also realize the danger of relying heavily on one country.

After reading the three articles, I think the most important point is that the U.S. getting its desired results in negotiations using tariffs and maintaining stable trade relationships are two different things. Even if tariffs don’t increase, the threat itself still influences other nations’ decisions. While I think tariffs can be used as a tool in negotiations, America’s close allies might reconsider their trade relations if such threats and pressures continue. Ultimately, I believe that maintaining a trade relationship of mutual trust is just as important as securing a favorable result in a negotiation.

Works Cited

• Aratani, Lauren, and Andrew Roth. “Trump Walks Back Greenland Tariffs Threat, Citing Vague ‘Deal’ over Territory.” The Guardian, 21 Jan. 2026. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/21/trump-framework-greenland-tariffs-threats.

• Boak, Josh, and Hyung-Jin Kim. “Trump Threatens to Hike Tariffs on South Korean Goods over Inaction on Trade Deal.” AP News, 26 Jan. 2026.

  https://apnews.com/article/trump-south-korea-tariffs-trade-deal-3c5accc4bb4585837d670d44e1acf8e2.

• Erickson, Bo, and Katharine Jackson. “Trump Threatens Canada with 100% Tariff over Pending Trade Deal with China.” Reuters, 24 Jan. 2026. Investing.com, https://www.investing.com/news/world-news/trump-threatens-canada-with-100-tariff-over-possible-deal-with-china-4464055.

• The White House. “P20260121DT-0589.” Photograph by Daniel Torok. Flickr, 23 Jan. 2026. https://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/55057070859/.

• Young, Margarita. A sign advising that products from the U.S. affected by a tariff will be marked with a symbol at the shelf. 24 Aug. 2025. Canadian Grocer, EnsembleIQ, https://canadiangrocer.com/consumers-could-benefit-dropped-tariffs-us-goods-unions-raise-concerns.