🔗 Share this article

Government ministers and leading parliamentarians have raised concerns that the United Kingdom's recent agreements with Washington are "fundamentally unstable." This comes after revelations that a recently announced deal on pharmaceutical tariffs, which pledges zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS facing higher prices, lacks any formal legal text beyond broad headline terms contained within government press releases.

Lacking Legal Footing

The US-UK pharmaceuticals agreement, hailed as a "significant" achievement, exists as an "broad understanding" without a signed legal text. Observers point out that the public statements from the UK and US governments frame the deal in markedly contrasting terms. The British version focuses on securing "duty-free access" as a unique achievement, while the American announcement concentrates on the expectation for the NHS to pay higher prices for new medications.

"We face a genuine possibility that the UK government has agreed to terms to increase medicine costs in return for nothing more than a verbal promise from President Trump," said David Henig, a trade policy analyst. "It is documented he has a record of not honouring his word."

A Pattern of Unreliability

Concerns have been intensified by Washington's action to put on ice the major technology agreement, which was previously heralded as "a generational step-change" in the bilateral relationship. The US cited a insufficient movement from the UK on reducing other tariffs as the reason for the pause.

In a separate development, concessions secured for British farmers as part of an May trade agreement have not been formally ratified by the US, despite a fast-approaching January deadline. "Our understanding is that the US has failed to approve the reciprocal tariff rate quota," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Anxiety Behind Closed Doors

In confidential discussions, ministers have expressed concerns 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, chair of the health select committee, argued: "The only thing more surprising than the administration's tactics is the UK government's naive belief that his administration is a trustworthy negotiator. The NHS is not a bargaining chip."

A Mixed Picture of Success and Setback

Officials have downplayed the possibility of the US reneging on the pharmaceuticals deal. One source indicated the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been pushing for the agreement, wanting clarity on imports and pricing, making it less abstract than the paused tech deal.

Officials concede that instability is inherent in dealing with the Trump administration. However, they argue that the UK has obtained tangible results for businesses, such as reduced duties on automobiles compared to other nations. "The fact we have 25% steel tariffs, which is better than the rate for the rest of the world, is a concrete advantage," one official said.

Nevertheless, delays have emerged in enacting the May tariff agreement. Promised reciprocal agricultural allowances have not materialized, and the pledge to "eliminate duties on UK metals" has is still pending, with tariffs fixed at 25%.

As negotiations continue, the two sides have planned to recommence talks on the paused tech prosperity deal in January, following what were described as "very positive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.