What does the Trump administration want from the rest of the world?

Buying more natural gas from American companies; reducing tariffs on American exports; lowering taxes for major Silicon Valley tech corporations... These are just a few of the demands that the Trump administration is expected to make in negotiations with dozens of countries trying to avoid the high import tariffs that the US imposed last week and then unexpectedly postponed.

While there remains much uncertainty about exactly what the White House will want, according to the Washington Post, citing more than a dozen sources familiar with or informed about the negotiations—some of whom requested anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the content—a clearer picture of what these bilateral agreements might look like is beginning to emerge.

Search for deals

On April 9th, President Trump abruptly suspended large-scale tariffs scheduled to take effect on more than 70 countries. He stated that this move was partly due to worrying fluctuations in the bond market. The US President announced that these tariffs would be postponed for 90 days to allow his advisory team and foreign partners time to reach individual agreements – a process he said had already begun with several countries. It should be noted that Trump maintained the 10% tariff on almost all imports into the US, while raising tariffs on Chinese goods to over 100% and postponing tariffs on other countries.

"The biggest problem they have is not having enough time in the day," Trump said of his aides on April 9. "Everyone wants to come and negotiate."

However, the Post noted that there remains considerable ambiguity regarding the specific form of these agreements, partly due to a lack of clarity in the US President's objectives. According to two sources familiar with the matter, even some of Trump's advisors admitted they were unclear about the objectives.

For example, Trump has repeatedly emphasized his desire to narrow the U.S. trade deficit with other countries. This idea has been rejected by many economists, both liberal and conservative, because it is unrealistic for the U.S. to export as much as it imports from poorer countries, and even attempting to do so could be economically damaging.

It's possible Trump will accept deals that narrow the deficit by forcing other countries to buy more American goods. However, it remains unclear how he will negotiate with developed economies that have trade surpluses with the U.S., such as Australia and the United Kingdom. And agreements in which countries agree to buy more American goods are unlikely to achieve Trump's goal of global trade balance—a goal largely influenced by the trading practices of some countries that are major exporters of goods.

Adding to the confusion for both US and foreign officials is the recent statement by White House adviser Peter Navarro, who argued that the German automaker BMW's multi-billion dollar investment in a South Carolina plant is "harmful to America." Meanwhile, this plant appears to represent the kind of domestic manufacturing in the US that Trump has long demanded.

“We don’t know what they want from other countries, and worse still, other countries don’t know what Trump wants from them,” commented Doug Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, a center-right think tank often skeptical of Trump’s tax policies. “I don’t understand how anyone can negotiate under those circumstances.”

In the midst of a lack of information, ambassadors, trade representatives, and other senior officials had to call and text each other to share information. They discussed whether Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent or Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick should be appointed as the main partner, and tried to figure out what might interest the Trump team.

However, progress remains very slow. A senior diplomat from a major U.S. trading partner said that in the days following the tariff announcement in the Rose Garden, the White House did not respond on what might be proposed to reduce the tariffs. Now that the highest tariffs have been postponed, Trump officials appear finally willing to negotiate in a “normal” way instead of just making demands without anything in return — but the diplomat said, the manner in which the White House wants to proceed remains unclear.

"India is having a lot of difficulty finding a clear interlocutor. Japan also doesn't know who to talk to on the American side. There's a lot of confusion," a source familiar with the matter said, requesting anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the information.

However, according to officials and experts, the basic content of the US demands is gradually becoming clear in the initial talks.

The agreements will likely be specific to each issue that U.S. officials perceive in each country. Senior Trump advisers such as Navarro and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer have indicated they want other countries to reduce both tariff barriers and non-tariff barriers, such as intellectual property theft and import quotas. Officials at the White House Council of Economic Advisers and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative have spent weeks studying policies they believe are causing the large trade deficit with China and looking for opportunities to boost U.S. exports. These studies will shape the specific demands of the U.S. administration.

One of the top demands is that countries no longer act as transit points for Chinese goods and businesses to circumvent U.S. tariffs, said Daniel Kishi, a policy adviser at American Compass, a center-right think tank. He said that Trump's team is likely to pressure other countries to impose similar tariffs on China and coordinate the use of other tools to prevent China from controlling supply chains in critical sectors.

Gas, beef, and technology

Two sources familiar with the U.S. administration's thinking said the proposed agreements would include a range of commitments to support domestic industries. For example, Japan might be offered a commitment to purchase large quantities of natural gas from the U.S. Europe has tariffs and regulations targeting tech giants, along with restrictions on U.S. beef imports—all of which could be included in the negotiations. Since Europe and the U.S. have largely eliminated tariffs between them, the trade agreements must address non-tariff barriers.

American farmers—a group already heavily impacted by the trade war—could also benefit from country-by-country deals, particularly if European countries are willing to ease restrictions on certain American agricultural products.

Some trade experts are skeptical that such industry-specific agreements will restore the glory of American manufacturing. However, with bond markets remaining volatile even after the tariff postponement, President Trump may feel the need to reach narrower agreements rather than allow trade-disrupting tariffs to reimpose on dozens of countries.

Countries could also take their own retaliatory measures, particularly if they are willing to dump the U.S. government bonds they hold. And Trump has shown he is willing to compromise when financial markets are volatile — something that could weaken the U.S. negotiating position.

“The key question is whether they will continue to make show-off deals to help a few specific companies, or whether they will focus on substantive commitments to rebalance trade and create space for domestic production,” said Lori Wallach, director of the left-leaning Rethink Trade organization at the American Economic Freedom Project. “If the plan is simply to get Europe to lift its data privacy policies on technology and allow us to export beef there, that has nothing to do with reducing America’s chronic trade deficit with the world.”