Saturday, 02 August, 2025
The United States has reduced its tariff rate on Bangladeshi imports to 20 per cent—down from 35 per cent—following a final round of intense negotiations in Washington. While the interim government has hailed the deal as a “landmark diplomatic victory”, questions linger over the concessions made to secure the agreement.
The White House announced the revised tariff rate on Friday, following days of talks between Bangladeshi officials and the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), which oversees American trade policy.
While the reduced tariff rate may offer immediate relief to Bangladesh’s key export sectors, particularly apparel, the lack of transparency surrounding the deal—and its long-term implications—merits careful public and parliamentary scrutiny. As trade becomes increasingly entangled with geopolitical alignment, the cost of market access is no longer measured solely in percentages.
According to a statement issued by the Chief Adviser’s Press Wing, Bangladesh’s new tariff rate now mirrors those of key apparel-exporting competitors such as Vietnam, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia—countries which also secured rates in the 19–20 per cent range. By comparison, India, which failed to reach a comprehensive agreement, will face a 25 per cent duty.
“Protecting our apparel industry was a top priority, but we also focused our purchase commitments on U.S. agricultural products. This supports our food security goals and fosters goodwill with U.S. farming states,” said Dr Khalilur Rahman, National Security Adviser and Bangladesh’s lead negotiator.
He added, “We negotiated carefully to ensure that our commitments aligned with our national interests and capacity. Today, we successfully avoided a potential 35 per cent reciprocal tariff. That’s good news for our apparel sector and the millions who depend on it.”
The announcement came just hours before U.S. President Donald Trump revealed a sweeping set of tariff measures affecting over 70 countries, some of which will now face import duties of up to 41 per cent. The new framework forms part of a broader push by the Trump administration to rebalance trade and address long-standing American concerns over deficits, non-tariff barriers, and national security risks.
Countries were required not only to agree to import more U.S. goods—including aircraft and agricultural products—but also to commit to structural reforms in areas affecting trade. Each country’s final tariff rate, the White House said, reflected the “depth and breadth” of its commitments.
The interim administration in Dhaka quickly claimed credit for the outcome. In a statement on Friday, Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus congratulated the negotiation team, calling the result a “decisive diplomatic victory”. His press secretary, Shafiqul Alam, described the revised rate as “good news”, saying it placed Bangladesh on a level playing field with key competitors.
Energy Adviser Fouzul Kabir Khan praised the talks on social media, asserting that Bangladesh’s commerce adviser had demonstrated strong negotiating skills. Law Adviser Asif Nazrul also hailed the 15-point tariff cut as a clear sign of success.
However, not everyone shared the optimism.
On social media, writer-researcher Altaf Parvez questioned what Bangladesh had to give up in return for the concession. “No one is disclosing the full details. Shouldn’t we examine both sides of the coin?” he asked, expressing concern that the deal may be bound by a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). “The people of Bangladesh have no idea under what conditions the U.S. gave tariff relief. It is certain the U.S. got what it wanted.”
Some argue that confidentiality is standard during such negotiations. Yet journalist Kamal Ahmed raised a broader issue: “Does the NDA only cover temporary confidentiality? Or does it mask long-term bilateral commitments, like the 25-year India–Bangladesh Friendship Treaty?”
Others warned of structural pressures on the export sector. Writer Kallol Mustafa noted that recent increases in port and depot charges—ranging from 40 per cent at Chattogram Port to up to 100 per cent at private inland container depots—could significantly erode any gains from tariff reductions.
He urged the interim government to rethink the port fee hikes and engage depot owners to ensure fair pricing.
Researcher Hasan Murshed cautioned against short-term relief that may come with long-term burdens. “We risk becoming entangled in growing foreign debt, higher import costs, and strategic dependence,” he said. Murshed also questioned the rationale behind Bangladesh’s pledge to purchase 25 Boeing aircraft, warning of steep operational and maintenance costs tied to the $6 billion deal.
Additionally, he argued that sourcing wheat, cotton, and soybean oil from the U.S.—rather than from more affordable alternatives like India, Brazil, or Russia—could raise shipping costs and increase import dependency.
Bangladeshi trade analysts have voiced concern that the recent tariff relief granted by the United States may provide only temporary respite, warning that broader vulnerabilities in the country’s export sector remain unresolved.
Following three months of negotiations, the U.S. agreed to lower supplementary tariffs on Bangladeshi goods from 35 per cent to 20 per cent. However, when combined with the existing 15 per cent average import duty previously imposed on Bangladeshi products, the effective tariff rate remains close to 35 per cent.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has imposed new supplementary tariffs on several regional competitors—25 per cent on India, 19 per cent on Pakistan, Indonesia, and Cambodia, and 20 per cent on Vietnam.
While several analysts acknowledged the deal as a short-term gain for Bangladesh, they cautioned that future shifts in U.S. trade policy could reintroduce pressure on exports. They urged the government in Dhaka to re-evaluate the country’s heavy dependence on a narrow set of export goods and a limited number of markets, particularly the United States.
Diversifying both product lines and destination markets, they argued, is essential to build resilience and better absorb future external shocks.
Editorial Note:
While the reduced tariff rate may offer immediate relief to Bangladesh’s key export sectors, particularly apparel, the lack of transparency surrounding the deal—and its long-term implications—merits careful public and parliamentary scrutiny.
As trade becomes increasingly entangled with geopolitical alignment, the cost of market access is no longer measured solely in percentages.
Comments
The United States has reduced its tariff rate on Bangladeshi imports to 20 per cent—down from 35 per cent—following a final round of intense negotiations in Washington. While the interim government has hailed the deal as a “landmark diplomatic victory”, questions linger over the concessions made to secure the agreement.
The White House announced the revised tariff rate on Friday, following days of talks between Bangladeshi officials and the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), which oversees American trade policy.
While the reduced tariff rate may offer immediate relief to Bangladesh’s key export sectors, particularly apparel, the lack of transparency surrounding the deal—and its long-term implications—merits careful public and parliamentary scrutiny. As trade becomes increasingly entangled with geopolitical alignment, the cost of market access is no longer measured solely in percentages.
According to a statement issued by the Chief Adviser’s Press Wing, Bangladesh’s new tariff rate now mirrors those of key apparel-exporting competitors such as Vietnam, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia—countries which also secured rates in the 19–20 per cent range. By comparison, India, which failed to reach a comprehensive agreement, will face a 25 per cent duty.
“Protecting our apparel industry was a top priority, but we also focused our purchase commitments on U.S. agricultural products. This supports our food security goals and fosters goodwill with U.S. farming states,” said Dr Khalilur Rahman, National Security Adviser and Bangladesh’s lead negotiator.
He added, “We negotiated carefully to ensure that our commitments aligned with our national interests and capacity. Today, we successfully avoided a potential 35 per cent reciprocal tariff. That’s good news for our apparel sector and the millions who depend on it.”
The announcement came just hours before U.S. President Donald Trump revealed a sweeping set of tariff measures affecting over 70 countries, some of which will now face import duties of up to 41 per cent. The new framework forms part of a broader push by the Trump administration to rebalance trade and address long-standing American concerns over deficits, non-tariff barriers, and national security risks.
Countries were required not only to agree to import more U.S. goods—including aircraft and agricultural products—but also to commit to structural reforms in areas affecting trade. Each country’s final tariff rate, the White House said, reflected the “depth and breadth” of its commitments.
The interim administration in Dhaka quickly claimed credit for the outcome. In a statement on Friday, Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus congratulated the negotiation team, calling the result a “decisive diplomatic victory”. His press secretary, Shafiqul Alam, described the revised rate as “good news”, saying it placed Bangladesh on a level playing field with key competitors.
Energy Adviser Fouzul Kabir Khan praised the talks on social media, asserting that Bangladesh’s commerce adviser had demonstrated strong negotiating skills. Law Adviser Asif Nazrul also hailed the 15-point tariff cut as a clear sign of success.
However, not everyone shared the optimism.
On social media, writer-researcher Altaf Parvez questioned what Bangladesh had to give up in return for the concession. “No one is disclosing the full details. Shouldn’t we examine both sides of the coin?” he asked, expressing concern that the deal may be bound by a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). “The people of Bangladesh have no idea under what conditions the U.S. gave tariff relief. It is certain the U.S. got what it wanted.”
Some argue that confidentiality is standard during such negotiations. Yet journalist Kamal Ahmed raised a broader issue: “Does the NDA only cover temporary confidentiality? Or does it mask long-term bilateral commitments, like the 25-year India–Bangladesh Friendship Treaty?”
Others warned of structural pressures on the export sector. Writer Kallol Mustafa noted that recent increases in port and depot charges—ranging from 40 per cent at Chattogram Port to up to 100 per cent at private inland container depots—could significantly erode any gains from tariff reductions.
He urged the interim government to rethink the port fee hikes and engage depot owners to ensure fair pricing.
Researcher Hasan Murshed cautioned against short-term relief that may come with long-term burdens. “We risk becoming entangled in growing foreign debt, higher import costs, and strategic dependence,” he said. Murshed also questioned the rationale behind Bangladesh’s pledge to purchase 25 Boeing aircraft, warning of steep operational and maintenance costs tied to the $6 billion deal.
Additionally, he argued that sourcing wheat, cotton, and soybean oil from the U.S.—rather than from more affordable alternatives like India, Brazil, or Russia—could raise shipping costs and increase import dependency.
Bangladeshi trade analysts have voiced concern that the recent tariff relief granted by the United States may provide only temporary respite, warning that broader vulnerabilities in the country’s export sector remain unresolved.
Following three months of negotiations, the U.S. agreed to lower supplementary tariffs on Bangladeshi goods from 35 per cent to 20 per cent. However, when combined with the existing 15 per cent average import duty previously imposed on Bangladeshi products, the effective tariff rate remains close to 35 per cent.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has imposed new supplementary tariffs on several regional competitors—25 per cent on India, 19 per cent on Pakistan, Indonesia, and Cambodia, and 20 per cent on Vietnam.
While several analysts acknowledged the deal as a short-term gain for Bangladesh, they cautioned that future shifts in U.S. trade policy could reintroduce pressure on exports. They urged the government in Dhaka to re-evaluate the country’s heavy dependence on a narrow set of export goods and a limited number of markets, particularly the United States.
Diversifying both product lines and destination markets, they argued, is essential to build resilience and better absorb future external shocks.
Editorial Note:
While the reduced tariff rate may offer immediate relief to Bangladesh’s key export sectors, particularly apparel, the lack of transparency surrounding the deal—and its long-term implications—merits careful public and parliamentary scrutiny.
As trade becomes increasingly entangled with geopolitical alignment, the cost of market access is no longer measured solely in percentages.
Comments
