Trump Bets Constantly Shifting Tariff Strategy Can Remake Global Trade

The president wants to keep other nations guessing, but his strategy faces risks.

WASHINGTON—President Trump’s whirlwind of trade moves is driven by a bet that keeping other countries guessing will allow him to better dictate negotiating terms with trading partners, ultimately making it easier to bend them to his will, according to Trump’s aides and allies.

President Trump said at a White House meeting Monday that he would be fine with not striking any trade deals at all.

The downside risks of that bet have become clearer in recent days. Trump’s tendency to back off deadlines threatens to weaken his hand, and his use of a novel legal theory to underpin much of his trade agenda opened him up to a legal challenge that might send the trade agenda back to the drawing board.

In the past week, Trump upended his trade talks by sending letters to more than two dozen countries, outlining the tariffs importers will pay on their goods after Aug. 1. He said the deadline won’t change and that his steep, so-called reciprocal tariffs would go into effect on that date—but urged countries to continue negotiating.

Then over the weekend Trump unexpectedly hit two of the U.S.’s largest trading partners, the European Union and Mexico, with threats for higher tariffs, even as Mexico’s economic team was in Washington, and an EU delegation was there days before.

And on Monday, Trump said at a White House meeting that he would be fine with not striking any trade deals at all. That message contradicts senior aides, such as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who for months have said that dozens of pacts are just around the corner.

“He goes on television and he calms the market. I go on television, I rile the market,” Trump said of Bessent, adding: “did you make any deals today? We’ve got a lot of them, but the best deal is just sending out the [tariff letter].”

Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum addresses a press conference.

Trump’s allies say that statement, along with others playing down his desire for trade pacts, are all part of his negotiating style. And Trump has repeatedly touted the amount of money tariffs are bringing in, crediting Bessent with the revenues at the Monday event. The U.S. collected nearly $27 billion in tariffs last month, more than three times the June 2024 figure.

“Controlling timing is a huge advantage in a negotiation,” said Everett Eissenstat, former deputy director of the National Economic Council in Trump’s first term. “He’s controlling timing—the pace, the tempo, the terms, he’s setting the table and he’s making the final decision.”

The move-fast-and-break-things approach is animated by lessons from the first term, Eissenstat added, when Trump officials took a more methodical, legalistic approach to tariffs. Trump allies ultimately ended up feeling that they could have done more to reshape U.S. trading relationships and cut chronic trade deficits.

“Americans have a dealmaker in chief in the White House, and they can rest assured that President Trump is using every lever of executive power to continue delivering more deals, more opportunities, and more victories for the United States,” said White House spokesman Kush Desai.

But the strategy cuts both ways. Trump has sowed uncertainty by twice delaying his reciprocal tariffs. He used a never-before-used legal theory to underpin many of his duties, allowing him to implement them at-will but also inviting a legal challenge that could nullify his reciprocal levies. And some in Trump’s own party worry that his contradictory statements risk undermining U.S. negotiating positions, particularly when he repeatedly splits with the economic advisers running negotiations.

On Sunday, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett said that Trump had been unsatisfied with trade proposals brought to him so far, saying on ABC’s “This Week” that Trump has seen the “sketches of deals” from his economic team, but thinks they “need to be better.”

A president repeatedly contradicting the negotiators “creates an environment where your negotiators are not empowered,” said Susan Schwab, former U.S. trade ambassador under George W. Bush. “If they know the decider is not going to agree to what [the] lead negotiators conclude, we’re not going to get their last, best and final offer.”

Some Trump allies acknowledge that the fast-moving trade approach has led to some mistakes or missteps where the team didn’t appear to be on the same page. One example came in May, Eissenstat said, a day after the U.S. and China arrived at a tariff truce in Geneva. The Commerce Department issued export controls prohibiting the sale of advanced microchips to China. That move, The Wall Street Journal reported, caught officials at USTR and the Treasury Department off guard and sent “mixed signals” to the Chinese, Eissenstat said.

Damage from the uncertainty can be cumulative and irreversible, Schwab said.

Trump’s allies say it makes sense for Trump to push for final concessions, and argue the letters from Trump are simply a tactic to increase pressure on partners.

“A little more time” can beget “a much, much better deal,” said Sen. Bill Hagerty (R., Tenn.), Trump’s former ambassador to Japan, who said that deals appear to be close with Tokyo and Seoul.

“When you take into account events in South Korea, with the recent change of government there, [and] an upper house election in Japan, both of those speak to giving a bit more time,” Hagerty said. “August 1 fits that timeline better than the earlier July [deadline].”

Write to Gavin Bade at gavin.bade@wsj.com

Trump Bets Constantly Shifting Tariff Strategy Can Remake Global Trade