Trade Relations Letter from the United States to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba

Key Chapter Title List

1. Opening of the White House Letter and Setting the Tone of the Relationship
2. Perception of Trade Deficit and Action Resolution
3. Market Access Invitation and Accusation of Imbalanced Relationship
4. New Tariff Policy Effective Date and Specific Rates
5. Regulation of Tariff Evasion Practices
6. Incentive Measures for Production in the United States
7. Warning Regarding Japan's Potential Retaliatory Tariffs
8. Attribution and Justification Discourse for Tariff Policy
9. Linking Trade Deficit to Economic and National Security
10. Conditions for Future Cooperation and Possibility of Policy Adjustment
11. Closing and Posture of the Letter

Document Introduction

This report provides an in-depth analysis based on the original text of an official letter from the White House to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba dated July 7, 2025. The letter serves as a unilateral policy declaration and action notification by the U.S. government regarding the current state of U.S.-Japan trade relations. Its core lies in the U.S. decision to implement new unilateral tariff measures on Japanese products, citing the existence of a "significant trade deficit," and explicitly elevating this economic issue to the level of national security. The content of the letter reveals the core logic, coercive tactics, and potential future trajectory of the current U.S. trade policy towards Japan.

The letter begins by emphasizing the "strength and commitment" of U.S.-Japan trade relations but quickly pivots, clearly stating that the United States, fully aware of a significant trade deficit with Japan, has "decided" to continue cooperation. This phrasing sets the tone for the entire letter: the U.S. positions itself as the party making concessions and frames subsequent actions as a correction to a long-standing imbalance. The letter attributes the root cause of the trade deficit to Japan's "tariff and non-tariff policies and trade barriers," accusing the bilateral relationship of being "far from reciprocal." Based on this perception, the U.S. announces that effective August 1, 2025, an additional 25% tariff will be levied on all Japanese goods exported to the United States, independent of all industry-specific tariffs.

The report further dissects the "carrot and stick" strategy embedded within the letter. On one hand, the U.S. uses the "world's number one market" as bait, inviting Japan to "participate" in the U.S. economy and promising expedited approvals and other facilitations for Japanese companies investing and building factories in the U.S., essentially encouraging the relocation of industries to the United States to avoid tariffs. On the other hand, the letter establishes severe countermeasures: if Japan imposes retaliatory tariffs, the U.S. will add Japan's increase on top of the 25% base rate; it also warns that attempts to circumvent higher tariffs through transshipment will face sanctions at the original higher rate. This series of measures aims to maximize U.S. negotiating leverage, forcing Japan to make concessions on market access and industrial layout.

Particularly noteworthy is the letter's narrative strategy of "securitizing" the trade issue. The document explicitly states that the trade deficit with Japan is not only an economic issue but also "a significant threat to our economy and even our national security." This discourse, directly linking economic competition to national security, provides a justification for implementing tough, even unilateral, trade measures and reflects the trend of increasing convergence between economic policy and security strategy in great power competition.

Finally, the letter leaves limited room for future policy adjustment, hinting that the U.S. "may consider" adjusting tariffs if Japan opens its market to the U.S. and removes barriers. This essentially sets the conditions for canceling or modifying tariffs entirely as unilateral concessions by Japan. Overall, this letter is a typical diplomatic document embodying the logic of "seeking cooperation through strength." Its analysis holds significant reference value for understanding the U.S. trade negotiation tactics towards allies, the use of economic coercion tools, and the politicization and securitization shift in major power economic and trade relations in the new era.