Home
+
Published : 01 Aug 2025, 10:49 PM
Bangladesh has secured a reduction in US import tariffs on its goods, a move viewed by many, including the interim government, as a “major diplomatic victory”.
Others, however, have questioned the conditions behind the agreement, calling for public transparency and scrutiny.
Earlier this year, after Donald Trump began his second term as US president, he announced steep import duties on over 100 countries.
Bangladesh was hit with a 35 percent tariff on its goods.
In the months that followed, Dhaka and Washington held a series of discussions, during which Bangladesh took several steps to address the US trade deficit.
These included a pledge to purchase 25 aircraft from Boeing and plans to increase imports of wheat, soybean oil, and cotton from the US.
In exchange, Washington offered tariff relief on over 600 of its own products, before finally reducing the duty on Bangladeshi goods to 20 percent following multiple negotiation rounds.
Members of the interim government have claimed the breakthrough as a major achievement.
In a message on Friday, Chief Advisor Muhammad Yunus said: “We proudly congratulate Bangladesh’s tariff negotiation team for securing a landmark trade deal with the US in a decisive diplomatic victory.”
Chief Advisor’s Press Secretary Shafiqul Alam described the revised tariff rate as “good news” for Bangladesh, noting that the 20 percent duty now aligns with what competitor countries such as Vietnam, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, and Indonesia face.
In some cases, he said, such as with India, the duties are even higher.
Energy Advisor Fouzul Kabir Khan praised the negotiating team in a Facebook post, writing that the commerce advisor had proved his capability through the talks.
Law Advisor Asif Nazrul, said the 15 percent reduction was another sign of success.
MIXED REACTIONS ONLINE
The news has triggered a range of reactions across social media.
Writer-researcher Altaf Parvez asked what concessions Bangladesh had offered in return for the tariff cut. “No one is disclosing the full details of what Bangladesh had to give in exchange.
“Shouldn’t we examine both sides of the coin?” he wrote, warning that citizens need to be mentally prepared for any trade-off.
Parvez also raised concern over the deal being covered by a non-disclosure agreement (NDA).
“The people of Bangladesh have no idea under what conditions the US gave tariff relief. It is certain that the US got what it wanted in return.”
Some have argued that it is standard practice not to disclose negotiation details during talks.
Journalist Kamal Ahmed asked whether the NDA involved only temporary confidentiality or if it masked a long-term bilateral commitment.
“If the NDA concerns long-term conditions like the 25-year India–Bangladesh Friendship Treaty, that would indeed be worrying,” he said.
Others expressed concern that Bangladesh’s export sector may face growing disadvantages.
Writer Kallol Mustafa said on Facebook that the sector could be placed under increased pressure compared with its rivals.
He pointed to two recent decisions -- the 40 percent average increase in port charges at Chattogram and the 30 to 100 percent rise in charges at private inland container depots (ICDs) -- as policies that could hike import costs and hurt competitiveness.
Mustafa urged the interim government to reconsider the port tariff hike and negotiate with depot owners to bring their fees down to sustainable levels.
Researcher Hasan Murshed warned of broader economic risks in chasing short-term relief.
He said the deal could trap Bangladesh in rising foreign debt, import costs, and military dependency.
The lack of public information about the NDA, he said, went against principles of transparency.
Murshed also questioned whether Bangladesh needed 25 Boeing aircraft, pointing out that the $6 billion purchase would entail substantial long-term operational and maintenance costs.
He added that sourcing cotton, wheat, and soybean oil from the US -- when Bangladesh could obtain them more cheaply from India, Brazil or Russia -- would “increase” shipping expenses.
