Traditionally, U.S. trade policy operated within international frameworks designed to reduce conflict and let market forces allocate resources, with government intervention used sparingly and in narrowly defined cases. The America First Trade Policy memorandum issued at the start of Trump’s term broke with these assumptions, signaling that trade policy would now be driven by a different logic with three main priorities.
The first priority is addressing what the administration terms “unfair and unbalanced” trade. From this perspective, large bilateral trade deficits are seen not as outcomes of complex global economic forces but as evidence that other countries are treating the United States unfairly. As a result, the administration has embraced broad use of tariffs, trade remedies and other measures as legitimate tools to restore balance, applying them widely rather than only in specific, legally prescribed situations. A prominent example is the “reciprocal tariffs” implemented in April 2025 that imposed a baseline tariff on imports alongside higher, country-specific tariffs tied to trade deficits. These actions are justified under emergency powers and reflect a fundamental departure from traditional economic interpretations of trade imbalances.
The second priority focuses on redefining the U.S.-China economic relationship. The memorandum frames China chiefly as a commercial rival whose state-directed economic practices have led to persistent imbalances that disadvantage the U.S. economy. Unlike some policy approaches that see economic interdependence as a security vulnerability to be unwound, this agenda treats interdependence as leverage to be bargained over. In practice, the administration has relied heavily on tariff authority in negotiations with China, adjusting measures through bilateral talks that emphasize specific commercial outcomes such as market access and purchase commitments rather than structural changes to China’s economic model.
The third priority elevates economic security, interpreting it as deriving from national strength-defined in terms of industrial capacity, technological leadership, and the ability to exercise leverage internationally. Instead of narrowly targeting risk mitigation, trade policy under this framework is used to build domestic production and capacity, often through tariffs and requirements that production and investment commitments benefit the U.S. Notably, this approach places less emphasis on the services sector, which constitutes a large part of U.S. GDP, and focuses more on manufacturing and resource-based industries. This reflects a view that economic security flows from domestic strength and leverage rather than from insulating the economy through reduced engagement.
Overall, the America First trade agenda represents a substantive shift in how trade policy is conceptualized: it’s no longer an instrument primarily for promoting efficiency within a global system, but a central mechanism for shaping domestic economic outcomes and international leverage. Whether this approach is seen as necessary or misguided, it departs from decades of U.S. policy and raises fundamental questions about the kind of international economic order the U.S. seeks to sustain.
Reference:
Heerman, K. (2026, January 21). What is Trump’s ‘America First’ trade policy agenda? Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-is-trumps-america-first-trade-policy-agenda/?utm_campaign=Economic%20Studies%20Bulletin&utm_medium=email&utm_content=400635422&utm_source=hs_email