How did the US reach tariff numbers?

The market has set its sights on how President Donald Trump’s administration reached the figures behind the US import cleaning fees declared Wednesday, sparking concerns and concerns around the world around the world.

Trump and the White House have posted a series of charts on social media detailing the tariff fees other countries are leviing on the US, and listing the columns they say are saying to include the country’s “currency manipulation and trade barriers.”

The adjacent columns show new US tariff rates in each country, as well as the European Union.

These rates are mostly about half of what the Trump administration claims countries have “claimed” the United States. CNBC was unable to independently verify US administration data on these obligations.

It didn’t take long for market observers to reverse engineer the formula. Many people, including journalist and author James Slowiecky, said the US appears to have split the trade deficit by imports from certain countries in order to reach customs charges in individual countries.

Such a methodology does not necessarily align with traditional approaches to calculating tariffs, meaning that the US only considered trade deficits in goods and ignored trade in services.

For example, the US said China would charge 67% tariffs. According to official data, the US had a deficit of $295.5 billion in China in 2024, while imports were worth $438.9 billion. If $29.54 billion is discounted at $438.9 billion, the result is 67%. The same mathematics checks Vietnam.

“This formula is about trade imbalances with the US, not mutual tariffs in the sense of tariff or non-tariff level distortion,” said Trinh Nguyen, senior economist in emerging Asia at Natixis. “This makes it very difficult for Asians, especially poor Asian countries, to meet their demands to reduce tariffs in the short term, as benchmarks buy more American goods than they export to the US.”

“Since US products are much more expensive and less purchasing power, such options are not the best in countries that cover the highest levels of tariffs,” Nguyen said. “Vietnam, for example, stands out by having the fourth-largest trade surplus with the United States, already lowering tariffs ahead of the tariff announcement without a grace period.”

The US also appeared to have applied 10% collection to areas operating a trade surplus.

The US Trade Representative’s office has placed its approach on its website. This appears to be somewhat similar to what Cybersruth already understood, except for a few differences.

“It is complicated to calculate the individual impact of the trade deficits of tens of thousands of tariffs, regulations, taxes and other policies of each country separately, but if not impossible, their combined effects can be sought by calculating tariff levels consistent with driving the trade deficit to zero,” the USTR website said. “If trade deficits persist due to tariff and non-tariff policies and fundamentals, tariff rates consistent with offsetting these policies and fundamentals are mutual and fair.”

The USTR also included the elasticity of imports to import prices, i.e., sensitive demand for foreign goods is price sensitive, and estimates of pass-through of higher tariffs on higher fees for imported goods.

This screenshot of the USTR web page shows in more detail the methods and formulas used.

Some analysts have acknowledged that the US government methodology can give more undulations to reach a consensus.

“What I can say is that the opacity surrounding tariff numbers may provide some flexibility when making transactions, but that could cost US credibility.”

– Kevin Breuninger of CNBC contributed to this article.