🔗 Share this article

Ministers and senior MPs have raised concerns that the United Kingdom's recent agreements with Donald Trump are "built on sand." This comes after revelations that a so-called "milestone" deal on medicines, which commits to zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS increasing its costs, lacks any underlying contract beyond limited headline terms published in government press releases.

A Deal Without Detail

The arrangement concerning medicines, promoted as a "significant" achievement, exists as an "broad understanding" without formal ratification. Observers point out that the public statements from the UK and US governments describe the deal in divergent terms. The British version focuses on securing "zero per cent tariffs" as a unique achievement, while the American announcement concentrates on the expectation for the NHS to pay significantly more for new medications.

"The danger exists that the UK government has made commitments to increase medicine costs in return for nothing more than a verbal promise from President Trump," stated David Henig, a trade policy analyst. "History shows he has a record of not following through on agreements."

Broader Instability and a Paused Tech Deal

Worries have been intensified by Washington's recent decision to put on ice the high-value digital accord, which was previously heralded as "a generational step-change" in the bilateral relationship. The US claimed a lack of progress from the UK on addressing wider trade issues as the reason for the pause.

Additionally, concessions promised for British farmers as part of an May trade agreement have still not been formally approved by the US, despite a imminent January deadline. "We have been informed that that the US has not yet signed off the agreed beef export quotas," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Uncertainty Among Officials

Privately, ministers have expressed concerns that the government's US-UK accords are lacking substance. One minister reportedly said the series of agreements as "resting on shaky ground," while another characterized the situation as the "new normal" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "greater risk and fluctuation."

Layla Moran, chair of the health select committee, remarked: "The only thing more surprising than the US approach is the UK government's naive belief that his administration is a trustworthy negotiator. The NHS is of vital importance."

Official Reassurances and Concrete Outcomes

Officials have downplayed the chances of the US backing out of the pharmaceuticals deal. One source noted the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been lobbying for the agreement, wanting clarity on imports and pricing, making it more concrete than the paused tech deal.

Officials admit that instability is a feature of dealing with the Trump administration. However, they argue that the UK has achieved real benefits for businesses, such as preferential tariff rates compared to other nations. "The fact we have 25% steel tariffs, which is better than the rate for the rest of the world, is not flimsy," one official said.

However, issues have surfaced in carrying out the May tariff agreement. Promised quotas on beef exports have failed to be approved, and the pledge to "remove tariffs on British steel and aluminium" has not been fulfilled, with tariffs staying at 25%.

As negotiations continue, the two sides have planned to recommence talks on the suspended digital agreement in January, following what were described as "constructive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.