At his "Liberation Day" tariffs event, President Donald Trump unveiled what he described as a reciprocal tariff plan affecting most countries.

A week later, Trump abruptly paused these tariffs for 90 days, although he kept in place an across-the-board 10% tariff and hiked Chinese tariffs up to 145%. By then, the stock market had plunged. 

Regardless of Trump's moves and their market impact, the math  underpinning his "reciprocal" plan made clear that they weren't reciprocal at all.

Tariff reciprocity had been Trump's longstanding trade policy aim. During the 2024 campaign, he said, "If they charge us, we charge them — an eye for an eye, a tariff for a tariff, same exact amount."

At the April 2 White House event, Trump used similar framing when releasing a list of new tariffs as high as 50% on virtually every country: "Reciprocal — that means they do it to us and we do it to them. Very simple — can't get any simpler than that."

However, the White House did not come up with its country-by-country tariffs by equalizing U.S. tariff rates with those imposed on the U.S. by other countries. Instead, it based the rate on the U.S. trade deficit with each country. Experts say this is not equivalent to reciprocity.

The White House's formula for calculating the April 2 tariff plan stemmed from some basic numerical inputs: It took the U.S. trade deficit in goods (but not services) with a particular country, divided it by the total value of goods imported into the U.S. from that country, then divided that by two.

As we reported, this formula produced higher tariff rates for countries which the U.S. receives more imports more than it sends exports.

The fact that the formula places high tariffs on these countries does not mean that these countries levy high tariffs on the U.S. According to Trump's list, many of the highest-tariffed countries were small in population, poor as measured by gross domestic product per capita, or both. Some of these countries have natural resources in high demand in the U.S., but are home to few people who can afford to buy U.S.-made products such as cars or computers.

For instance, Madagascar, an island nation off Africa's mainland that was among the nations with the highest proposed tariffs, "has roughly 80% of the global supply of vanilla," said Ross Burkhart, a Boise State University political scientist who studies trade policy. "The U.S. cannot produce vanilla, but needs it in foodstuffs, so purchases it. Madagascar is a relatively poor country, so it cannot make up in purchases what it makes in exported vanilla."

The top tariff rate on Trump's list was for Lesotho, a country landlocked by South Africa. Lesotho "exports diamonds and textiles and doesn't import many expensive capital- and technology-intensive U.S. goods," said Kent Jones, a Babson College emeritus economic professor. "Why should its bilateral trade with the U.S. be balanced?"

Countries like Madagascar and Lesotho do impose tariffs, but their tariff levels are not especially high compared to the rest of the world. The two nations' overall tariff rates for all countries, including the U.S., rank 53rd and 107th in the world, respectively.

In other words, while Trump said in the campaign these "reciprocal" tariffs would be for "the same exact amount" as the other country levied tariffs against the U.S., the now-paused country-by-country tariffs were not determined by reciprocity.

"A reciprocal tariff would take into account the other country's tariff rates on goods and services," Burkhart said. Simply put, he said, these tariffs "are not reciprocal tariffs."

If Trump wanted reciprocity, he "would accept zero-for-zero tariffs as a solution," but he has not done so, Jones said.

Our ruling

During the campaign, Trump promised, "If they charge us, we charge them — an eye for an eye, a tariff for a tariff, same exact amount."

Trump may have described the April 2 country-by-country tariffs as "reciprocal," but that doesn't mean that they were.

The tariff rates he prepared to impose didn't take into account whether that partner was imposing any kind of tariff on the U.S. Instead, the administration calculated the rates based on whether that country has a trade surplus with the U.S. — something that can happen for many reasons, including a nation's specialized exports of its natural resources, its poverty or its small size.

Trump has paused country-by-country tariffs for 90 days. If he reimposes them as he outlined April 2, he would not be enacting the reciprocal tariffs he campaigned on. 

There is no movement on the original promise to charge tariffs of the "same exact amount" countries charge the U.S. That fits our definition of Stalled.

President Donald Trump, during his campaign, promised to institute a system of "reciprocal tariffs," designed to equalize trade barriers between the U.S. and its trading partners.

"If they charge us, we charge them — an eye for an eye, a tariff for a tariff, same exact amount," Trump said in a June 2023 policy video.

On Feb. 13, Trump set the process in motion.

Trump's White House released a memo addressed to top administration officials that deemed a "lack of reciprocity" as "one source of our country's large and persistent annual trade deficit in goods — closed markets abroad reduce United States exports and open markets at home result in significant imports." 

The memo said a forthcoming plan would analyze every trading partner to determine what the administration deems unfair trade practices — not only tariffs, but also the partners' value-added taxes, subsidies, regulations and exchange-rate manipulation.

The memo directed six Cabinet or White House officials to present the results of their investigations to the White House within 180 days. 

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the country assessments could be done by April 1, with implementation potentially starting as soon as April 2.

"This plan will put the American worker first, improve our competitiveness in every area of industry, reduce our trade deficit, and bolster our economic and national security," the White House said in an accompanying fact sheet. 

Trump's approach on trade has critics. 

"Trump's understanding of 'reciprocity' runs counter to the use of 'reciprocity' in any sense of the  word, including the sense in which reciprocity has been used in the creation of the international trading system," wrote Petros C. Mavroidis, a Columbia University law professor, in a paper for the European think tank Breugel. "If applied, it would destroy that system."

Mavroidis wrote that "while reciprocity is a fundamental principle of the world trading system, it is never understood in terms of total numerical equivalence" but rather as "a broad give and take involving many product lines and sectors."

Trump hasn't implemented reciprocal tariffs, but based on his orders, a plan is on the way. This promise rates In the Works.