Michael Vadon - Flickr

Trade Freedom and The Myth of Tariff Reciprocity

Trump's trade agenda represents a misguided approach to achieving global fairness.

President Trump is imposing steep and expansive tariffs on the world economy as part of what he calls his tariff “Liberation Day” agenda.

It is not clear how these massive tax hikes, reaching as high as $600 billion according to the White House’s own estimates, will “liberate” anything other than money from the wallets of American consumers. Nonetheless, Trump has justified his new tariff policy around the claim that the United States is being taken advantage of by the discriminatory trade policies of other nations.

In the White House’s telling, these new tariffs “will bring back fairness and prosperity to the distorted international trade system and stop Americans from being taken advantage of.” Trump describes his measures as “reciprocal” and claims they are only necessary because other countries apply even more egregious tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) to American goods on the international market. As Trump himself recently put it when justifying his tariffs on Canada, “We’ve been ripped off for years and we won’t be ripped off anymore.”

There’s a problem with the White House’s tariff justification, though: it’s a complete myth.

The United States is currently one of the worst offenders among developed nations in placing discriminatory tariffs and NTBs on our trading partners. This ignominious position may be seen in the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom, which compiles an annual “trade freedom” score for nearly 200 countries and political jurisdictions. According to the 2025 report, the United States ranks in 69th place, putting us lower than New Zealand (2nd), Australia (3rd), the United Kingdom (17th), Canada (18th), France (38th), and Germany (39th).

The Heritage 100-point scale combines the country’s trade-weighted average tariff rate with a scoring of its NTBs—an assortment of quotas, export restrictions, subsidies, regulations, and similar policies that discriminate against foreign goods or unfairly prop up domestic products. A score closer to 100 represents lower tariff rates and fewer discriminatory trade policies.

The United States’ score of 75.6 places it well below most of the European Union countries, as well as all of the aforementioned major trading partners. In fact, our discriminatory trade policies place us in closer proximity to China’s score (74) than one of the main targets of Trump’s current trade war, Canada (83.2).

           “Trade Freedom” Score for Top 100 Countries, (Heritage Foundation 2025)

Country Index Year Trade Freedom
Singapore 2025 95
New Zealand 2025 90.4
Australia 2025 90
Mauritius 2025 87.4
Bahrain 2025 86.6
Liechtenstein 2025 86.6
Switzerland 2025 86.6
Taiwan 2025 86.6
Georgia 2025 86.2
Seychelles 2025 85.2
Norway 2025 85
Brunei Darussalam 2025 84.8
Spain 2025 84.6
Kosovo 2025 84.2
Albania 2025 83.4
Malaysia 2025 83.4
United Kingdom 2025 83.4
Canada 2025 83.2
Israel 2025 82.8
Jordan 2025 82.4
Peru 2025 81.6
Qatar 2025 81.6
Uzbekistan 2025 80.6
Iceland 2025 80.4
Kiribati 2025 80
Timor-Leste 2025 80
Papua New Guinea 2025 79.8
Vietnam 2025 79.8
Austria 2025 79.6
Belgium 2025 79.6
Bulgaria 2025 79.6
Croatia 2025 79.6
Cyprus 2025 79.6
Czech Republic 2025 79.6
Denmark 2025 79.6
Estonia 2025 79.6
Finland 2025 79.6
France 2025 79.6
Germany 2025 79.6
Greece 2025 79.6
Hungary 2025 79.6
Ireland 2025 79.6
Italy 2025 79.6
Latvia 2025 79.6
Lithuania 2025 79.6
Luxembourg 2025 79.6
Malta 2025 79.6
Montenegro 2025 79.6
Netherlands 2025 79.6
Poland 2025 79.6
Portugal 2025 79.6
Romania 2025 79.6
Slovakia 2025 79.6
Slovenia 2025 79.6
Sweden 2025 79.6
Indonesia 2025 79.4
The Philippines 2025 79.2
Botswana 2025 78.8
Panama 2025 78.6
United Arab Emirates 2025 78.4
Oman 2025 78.2
Paraguay 2025 78.2
Chile 2025 78
North Macedonia 2025 77.8
Moldova 2025 77.2
Serbia 2025 77.2
Japan 2025 76.2
Kuwait 2025 75.6
United States 2025 75.6
Costa Rica 2025 75.4
Tonga 2025 75.4
Micronesia 2025 75
Mongolia 2025 74.4
Turkmenistan 2025 74.2
China 2025 74
Mozambique 2025 74
Eswatini 2025 73.6
Kyrgyz Republic 2025 73.6
Kazakhstan 2025 73.2
South Korea 2025 73.2
Ukraine 2025 73.2
Uruguay 2025 73
Cuba 2025 72.8
Saudi Arabia 2025 72.8
Turkey 2025 72.8
Thailand 2025 72.4
Colombia 2025 72.2
Guatemala 2025 72.2
Mexico 2025 72.2
Tajikistan 2025 72.2
Armenia 2025 72
Jamaica 2025 71.8
Brazil 2025 71.6
Angola 2025 70.4
El Salvador 2025 70.4
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2025 70
Côte d’Ivoire 2025 70
Namibia 2025 70
Azerbaijan 2025 69.8
Pakistan 2025 69.8

The Heritage index should not be dismissed as a product of a right-leaning think tank. Its data are consistent with (and indeed draw upon) other indexes of tariff barriers. The World Bank maintains an index of each country’s weighted mean tariff rate in the most recent year with available data, with 2022 being the current measure. This index does not include NTBs, which are more difficult to quantify. It is nonetheless a reputable source of the tariff component of current trade barriers.

According to the World Bank’s series, the United States’ weighted mean tariff rate sits at 1.49%, placing it 47th overall among countries. For comparison, Australia (0.99%), the United Kingdom (1%), all of the European Union countries (1.33%), and Canada (1.37%) have lower tariff rates than the United States.

In fact, according to estimates from the Tax Foundation, Trump’s “reciprocal” tariff policies are currently estimated to raise the United States’ average tariff rate to 8.4% by the end of 2025. Further tariff hikes on “liberation day” could raise this even higher, with some inside the administration calling for a “benchmark” overall tariff of 20%. For reference, an 8.4% average tariff would place the United States just behind Uganda (7.86%) in the World Bank’s rankings. A 20% benchmark tariff would give us the third-highest tariff rate in the world, just behind Equatorial Guinea (18.2%) and significantly higher than the tariff rates imposed by the Marxist governments of Cuba (9.16%) and Venezuela (12.8%).

Trump's Average Tariff Rate - Tax Foundation

These data conclusively belie the White House’s claim that the United States is the victim of unfair and discriminatory tariff and NTB policies from abroad. In reality, we impose higher tariffs and more severe NTBs on average than most developed nations.

If Trump truly wanted tariff “fairness,” he would abandon the rhetoric of victimization that he has adopted. The data above show that it has little basis in empirical reality. Genuine trade reciprocity would entail the United States lowering our current tariff rates and removing NTBs to put us at closer parity with our major trading partners.

Phillip W. Magness is a Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute and the David J. Theroux Chair in Political Economy. He has served as Senior Research Fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, and as Academic Program Director at the Institute for Humane Studies and Adjunct Professor of Public Policy in the School of Public Policy and Government at George Mason University. He received his Ph.D. from George Mason University’s School of Public Policy.
Catalyst articles by Phillip Magness | Full Biography and Publications