Anna Jiwon Park has been covering the politics at The Korea Times since the summer of 2024, when she joined the press pool for the Office of the President in Korea. Prior to that, she spent about five years reporting extensively on financial markets, regulatory authorities and the financial industry. She joined The Korea Times in 2019 after spending eight years as a broadcast journalist at Arirang TV, Korea’s leading global broadcaster, covering politics, defense and culture.
Experts urge swift response to Trump’s tariff threat on Korean goods
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks about the economy at a rally in Clive, Iowa, Tuesday (local time). AP-Yonhap
By Anna J. Park
Lagging behind Japan, Seoul faces pressure to accelerate US investments
Korean trade experts warn that a legislative stalemate in the National Assembly is fueling American protectionism, as U.S. President Donald Trump threatens to raise tariffs on Korean goods to 25 percent. Analysts say delays in passing promised legislation on U.S. investments have tested Washington’s patience — a view echoed by the presidential office earlier this week.
With a landmark $350 billion investment framework now hanging in the balance, observers caution that continued political deadlock could turn a procedural holdup into a costly trade conflict, unraveling the fragile economic truce between the two allies.
Kang In-soo, a trade expert and economics professor at Sookmyung Women’s University, noted that while Trump publicly referred to a 25 percent tariff rate, the U.S. Federal Register still lists the rate at 15 percent, leaving room for further negotiation.
Although Kang acknowledged that Trump’s tariff hike remarks may have been shaped by domestic political considerations, he stressed that Korea has limited leverage to push back and should instead focus on removing any pretexts for further demands from Washington.
“The joint fact sheet agreed upon by Korea and the United States explicitly allows for tariff increases if implementation is deemed insufficient,” Kang told The Korea Times.
“Since Korea introduced related legislation in November, progress has stalled beyond that point. Swift implementation is clearly in Korea’s interest," Kang added, noting that the legislation could pass without major obstacles, given the ruling party’s majority at the National Assembly.
He said U.S. officials might be comparing Korea’s pace with Japan’s, noting that Tokyo moved quickly by amending enforcement decrees in September and selecting investment projects as early as March.
“When Korea cites foreign exchange conditions or fiscal constraints as reasons for delays, it may come across as making excuses, particularly when contrasted with Japan’s speed,” Kang said.
Kang advised Korea to follow Japan’s example by identifying and presenting concrete investment projects, even on a small scale.
President Lee Jae Myung and U.S. President Donald Trump shake hands at the Oval Office in the White House, Washington, Aug. 25, 2025. Yonhap
Choi Won-mog, an international trade law expert and professor at Ewha Womans University, also said swift legislation, paired with clear communication with the United States, is essential to maintaining long-term trust between the two countries.
He explained that the scope of the joint agreements reached at summit talks in August and October of last year extends far beyond tariffs, encompassing areas like digital trade, investments and services. He said these must also be clearly organized and streamlined to enable effective communication with Washington.
“The government needs to clearly delineate each ministry’s roles and responsibilities and present a concrete implementation roadmap with a clear timeline to enable efficient consultations with the U.S.,” Choi said.
The trade law expert also dismissed speculation that delaying domestic procedures could be a viable strategy in anticipation of a possible U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the legality of Trump-era reciprocal tariffs.
“Even if the court were to rule against those tariffs, the U.S. could still impose retaliatory duties by selectively invoking other laws, such as Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, and doing so would not conflict with Supreme Court precedent,” he explained, noting that Trump has a wide array of tools at his disposal to pressure Korea into implementing last year’s agreement.
Choi warned such tactics reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the U.S. system. He underscored that “Trumpism” has deep historical and structural roots in U.S. politics and is likely to persist over the long term.
“Unless Korea recognizes this reality, misunderstandings and miscalculations will continue to recur.”
Kang expressed a similar view, describing any strategy centered on waiting for a U.S. Supreme Court ruling as “completely misguided.” He said Trump may place greater importance on securing fulfillment of investment commitments from Korea than on generating tariff revenue.
"The joint fact sheet covers not only tariffs but also bilateral investment commitments,” Kang said. “Even if tariffs imposed were ruled unconstitutional and subject to refunds, that outcome could actually increase pressure on Korea to honor its investment pledges.”