US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, confirmed by the Senate in February 2025, has made the Trump administration's position unmistakable: negotiations over tariffs will not result in their wholesale removal.
Speaking to an audience at the American embassy in Washington, Greer indicated that the real question is whether trade patterns serve the national interest, and that for President Trump and his administration, that means a trade policy that accelerates re-industrialisation. His language, as reported by the Sydney Morning Herald, left no room for ambiguity: "If your point is 'take down all the tariffs', we're not going to get along."
The statement crystallises the administration's approach at a moment of significant flux in US trade policy. The Supreme Court ruled in February 2026 that the president lacks authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Rather than retreat, Trump signed an executive order in February 2026 imposing a 10 percent tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, then increased the rate to 15 percent.
Under Section 122, the president can impose tariffs of up to 15 percent without investigation, but those tariffs cannot last more than 150 days unless Congress approves them. This legal manoeuvre replaces revenue lost when the courts struck down the earlier tariff regime. Economists estimate the tariffs announced through December 2025 impose an average burden of about $1,230 per household in 2026.
Australian exporters face direct consequences. The US will impose a baseline 10 percent tariff on Australian beef, sheepmeat and goatmeat. For an industry that exported nearly 400,000 tonnes of Australian beef to the US in 2024, the tariff adds cost and uncertainty to markets already strained by global competition and supply chain fragility.
What makes Greer's statement significant is its directness about negotiation parameters. The administration has established a structure of 10 percent tariffs on countries with which the US runs a surplus, 15 percent on countries with small deficits, and higher tariffs on countries with large trade deficits. This framework, Greer's words suggest, is not merely a negotiating position but a floor. Countries seeking lower tariffs must offer concessions on non-tariff barriers, investment commitments, or market access for US goods. Complete tariff removal, however, remains off the table.
More than 20 states are suing the Trump administration over its planned 15 percent global tariff, saying the president is overstepping his power. Legal challenges continue to pile up, yet the administration shows no indication of backing away. Instead, the White House has said it will use additional authorities such as Section 301 and Section 232 to impose further tariffs later this year.
Greer's remarks also reflect internal administration philosophy. What the administration calls the "Turnberry Round" of global trade negotiations continues at an accelerated pace, with trade agreements and frameworks concluded in autumn with Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam and Korea. For countries willing to negotiate, tariff relief exists. For those demanding unilateral removal, Greer made clear, the conversation is finished before it starts.
The challenge for Australian policymakers is clear. Industry meetings with US stakeholders and Australian Embassy officials have been scheduled to assess next steps in response to the tariff decision. But they will occur within parameters Greer has already set. Any negotiation assumes tariffs remain in place unless the Trump administration extracts concessions it values more than the tariff revenue they provide.