🔗 Share this article

Elected officials have raised concerns that the United Kingdom's series of deals with the US administration are "fundamentally unstable." This follows revelations that a much-touted deal on medicines, which pledges zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS paying more, lacks any detailed agreement beyond vague headline terms outlined by government press releases.

Lacking Legal Footing

The deal on drug tariffs, described as a "landmark" achievement, is still an "broad understanding" without formal ratification. Observers point out that the press releases from the UK and US governments describe the deal in divergent terms. The British version emphasizes securing "duty-free access" as a unique achievement, while the American announcement dwells on the expectation for the NHS to pay 25% more for new medications.

"We face a genuine possibility that the UK government has made commitments to increase medicine costs in return for little more than a pledge from President Trump," said David Henig, a trade expert. "We know he has a record of not following through on agreements."

Wider Concerns Amidst a Suspended Agreement

Concerns have been heightened by Washington's action to pause the high-value digital accord, which was previously described as "a huge leap forward" in the bilateral relationship. The US claimed a failure to advance from the UK on reducing other tariffs as the reason for the pause.

Additionally, concessions agreed to for British farmers as part of an May trade agreement have still not been formally signed off 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.

Private Ministerial Concerns

Privately, ministers have admitted unease that the government's agreements with the US are lacking substance. One minister reportedly said the series of agreements as "built on sand," while another described the situation as the "new normal" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "greater risk and fluctuation."

Layla Moran, a senior MP on the health committee, stated: "Perhaps most shocking than the administration's tactics is the UK government's optimistic assumption that his administration is a good faith actor. The NHS is not a bargaining chip."

Official Reassurances and Concrete Outcomes

Government figures have downplayed the possibility of the US backing out of the pharmaceuticals deal. One source suggested the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been lobbying for the agreement, desiring stability on imports and pricing, making it more concrete than the paused tech deal.

Officials acknowledge that instability is a feature of dealing with the current US leadership. However, they argue that the UK has achieved real benefits for businesses, such as reduced duties on automobiles compared to other nations. "Our achievement of 25% steel tariffs, which is lower than the rate for the rest of the world, is not flimsy," one official said.

Nevertheless, problems have surfaced in carrying out the initial US-UK accord. Promised quotas on beef exports have yet to be finalized, and the commitment to "eliminate duties on UK metals" has remains unmet, with tariffs fixed at 25%.

Moving forward, the two sides have agreed to resume talks on the suspended digital agreement in January, following what were described as "productive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.