Trade, Tariffs & Fair Market Access
TRADE, TARIFFS & FAIR MARKET ACCESS
TRADE & MANUFACTURING
Trade creates prosperity. Strategic dependence creates vulnerability.
America should maintain domestic or reliable allied capacity in critical sectors including:
Defense
Semiconductors
Pharmaceuticals
Energy equipment
Critical minerals
Infrastructure
Trade actions, tariffs, subsidies, and restrictions should disclose their expected effects on consumers, workers, farmers, small businesses, supply security, retaliation risk, and domestic investment. Confront intellectual-property theft and unfair state-sponsored economic practices under clear and enforceable rules.
America should become the best place in the world to build.
RECIPROCAL TRADE & FAIR MARKET ACCESS
Core Principle
International trade should operate on reasonably reciprocal terms.
The United States should not permanently provide foreign countries better access to the American market than those countries provide to American workers, farmers, manufacturers, and businesses.
Where another country imposes a discriminatory tariff, quota, tax, regulatory burden, or market-access restriction on American commerce, the United States may impose an equivalent or proportionate measure until fair treatment is restored.
The objective is not permanent trade barriers.
The objective is reciprocal access and fair competition.
Reciprocity Standard
For major trading relationships, the United States should regularly compare how American goods and services are treated abroad with how equivalent foreign goods and services are treated in the United States.
The review should examine:
tariffs;
quotas;
import restrictions;
discriminatory taxes;
licensing restrictions;
customs barriers;
agricultural restrictions;
discriminatory technical standards;
government procurement restrictions;
digital-service restrictions;
subsidies;
local-content requirements;
other material barriers to trade.
Matching Tariffs
Where a foreign country imposes a tariff on a category of American goods without an equivalent U.S. restriction, the United States may impose a comparable tariff on equivalent goods from that country.
Example:
If Country A imposes a 25 percent tariff on an American product, the United States may impose a comparable tariff on materially equivalent imports from Country A.
Reciprocity should generally operate:
product for product, sector for sector, and rate for rate where practical.
Reciprocity Beyond Tariffs
Foreign trade barriers do not always appear as tariffs.
Reciprocal policy should also address discriminatory:
quotas;
taxes;
government purchasing rules;
licensing requirements;
inspection regimes;
domestic-content mandates;
regulatory barriers.
If another country effectively prevents American firms from competing in a market while its own firms receive open access to the United States, American policy should be permitted to respond proportionately.
Equal Market Access
The preferred outcome should be:
zero barrier for zero barrier.
Where a trading partner eliminates an unjustified restriction against American commerce, the corresponding American reciprocal measure should ordinarily be removed.
Reciprocity should therefore create an incentive for both countries to lower barriers.
Automatic Review
The United States Trade Representative should maintain a regularly updated Reciprocal Trade Report comparing major trading partners' treatment of American commerce with U.S. treatment of their commerce.
The report should identify:
tariff disparities;
market-access disparities;
discriminatory policies;
subsidies;
quotas;
unresolved trade disputes.
Evidence Before Retaliation
Reciprocal measures should require documented evidence of the foreign restriction.
The government should identify:
foreign policy involved;
American industry affected;
estimated economic burden;
proposed reciprocal response;
expected domestic consequences.
Reciprocity should not be based solely on political rhetoric.
Proportionality
American countermeasures should generally be proportionate to the foreign restriction.
The United States should not ordinarily answer a minor trade restriction with vastly greater economic retaliation.
The response should be sufficient to:
restore bargaining leverage;
compensate for discriminatory treatment;
encourage removal of the original barrier.
Negotiation Before Escalation
Where circumstances permit, the United States should first provide the trading partner an opportunity to:
remove the discriminatory measure;
negotiate equivalent access;
enter a reciprocal trade agreement.
Immediate measures may remain appropriate where national security, severe economic harm, or deliberate discrimination requires faster action.
Automatic Reduction
Reciprocal tariffs and restrictions should not become permanent simply because government enjoys the revenue.
When the foreign country reduces or eliminates the restriction, the corresponding U.S. measure should automatically be reviewed for reduction or removal.
Sunset Requirement
Major reciprocal trade measures should expire after a defined period unless:
the foreign restriction remains;
Congress or the authorized trade authority determines continuation is justified.
Temporary trade retaliation should not quietly become permanent protectionism.
Consumer Impact Review
Before imposing major reciprocal tariffs, government should estimate the likely effect on:
consumer prices;
American manufacturers;
farmers;
supply chains;
employment;
small businesses.
Where the cost to Americans would substantially exceed the benefit of the reciprocal measure, alternative responses should be considered.
Strategic Goods
National-security products may receive different treatment.
This may include:
defense equipment;
semiconductors;
critical minerals;
energy infrastructure;
telecommunications;
advanced AI technology;
essential medicines;
other strategically important goods.
Restrictions involving these products may be justified by national security even where exact reciprocity does not exist.
Developing and Humanitarian Exceptions
The United States may maintain limited preferences for:
humanitarian goods;
disaster relief;
very poor developing countries;
strategically important partners;
where Congress determines that doing so advances legitimate humanitarian or national interests.
Such exceptions should be transparent.
No Favoritism Between Countries
Countries receiving preferential American market access should provide meaningful reciprocal benefits unless a separate national-security, humanitarian, or treaty justification exists.
Trade relationships should not depend primarily on political favoritism.
Subsidies and State-Owned Enterprises
Reciprocity should account for foreign governments that artificially support domestic companies through:
direct subsidies;
below-market financing;
state-owned enterprises;
preferential energy;
hidden government support.
Where such assistance materially distorts competition against American firms, targeted countervailing measures may be appropriate.
Government Procurement
Foreign companies should not automatically receive broader access to U.S. government procurement than American companies receive in the foreign country's government market.
Procurement agreements should seek reciprocal access.
Agriculture
American farmers should receive reasonably comparable access to foreign agricultural markets.
Trade negotiations should address:
tariffs;
quotas;
sanitary restrictions;
licensing barriers;
discriminatory agricultural subsidies.
Legitimate food-safety requirements should remain permitted.
Intellectual Property
Countries receiving broad access to American markets should provide meaningful protection against:
intellectual-property theft;
trade-secret theft;
counterfeiting;
state-sponsored technology theft.
Systematic failure to protect American intellectual property may justify targeted trade consequences.
Trade Agreements
Future trade agreements should contain measurable reciprocity provisions.
Agreements should identify:
market access;
tariff commitments;
dispute procedures;
enforcement;
remedies for violations.
Trade agreements should not merely depend on diplomatic promises.
Congressional Oversight
Major long-term reciprocal trade restrictions should receive congressional oversight.
Emergency executive trade authority may be appropriate for immediate responses, but substantial long-term changes to U.S. trade policy should not rest indefinitely on unilateral executive authority.
Transparency
Businesses and consumers should be able to identify:
which reciprocal tariffs exist;
why they were imposed;
foreign policy being answered;
amount collected;
expiration or review date.
Trade policy should not become an opaque collection of permanent tariffs.
Core MPA Standard
America should offer fair access to countries that offer fair access to America.
If another country places a substantial discriminatory burden on American goods or businesses, the United States may respond with an equivalent or proportionate burden.
If that country removes the barrier, America should be prepared to remove the reciprocal barrier.
The objective is not:
tariffs for the sake of tariffs.
The objective is:
equal treatment, reciprocal market access, and fair competition.
Related policies: Foreign Affairs; China, Taiwan & Indo-Pacific Strategy; Strategic Adversaries & Authoritarian States; Federal Spending & National Debt; Consumer Rights.
Status: Proposed / Draft — not yet formally adopted.
Originally published: August 15, 2026.
Last updated: September 25, 2026.
Version: Draft 0.1.