🔗 Share this article

Ministers and senior MPs have raised concerns that the United Kingdom's negotiated accords with Washington are "fundamentally unstable." This stems from revelations that a much-touted deal on drug pricing, which pledges zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS paying more, lacks any detailed agreement beyond broad headline terms published in government press releases.

Lacking Legal Footing

The US-UK pharmaceuticals agreement, promoted as a "generational" achievement, is still an "statement of intent" without a signed legal text. It has been highlighted that the press releases from the UK and US governments frame the deal in divergent terms. The British version focuses on securing "duty-free access" as a singular success, while the American announcement dwells on the agreement for the NHS to pay higher prices for new medications.

"There is a serious risk that the UK government has agreed to terms 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 form for not following through on agreements."

Wider Concerns Amidst a Suspended Agreement

Worries have been heightened by Washington's recent decision to pause the major technology agreement, which was previously heralded as "a huge leap forward" in the bilateral relationship. The US pointed to a failure to advance from the UK on reducing other tariffs as the reason for the pause.

Additionally, concessions promised for British farmers as part of an earlier tariff deal have not been formally ratified by the US, despite a fast-approaching January deadline. "It is our belief that the US has not yet signed off the reciprocal tariff rate quota," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Uncertainty Among Officials

In confidential discussions, ministers have expressed concerns that the government's US-UK accords are unstable and unpredictable. One minister was quoted as stating the series of agreements as "built on sand," while another characterized the situation as the "prevailing condition" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "increased uncertainty and instability."

Layla Moran, chair of the health select committee, stated: "The only thing more surprising than the US approach is the UK government's naive belief that his administration is a reliable partner. The NHS is of vital importance."

Official Reassurances and Concrete Outcomes

Ministry sources have attempted to minimize the risk of the US withdrawing from the pharmaceuticals deal. One source suggested the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been advocating for the agreement, seeking certainty on imports and pricing, making it more concrete than the paused tech deal.

Officials concede that volatility is part and parcel of dealing with the Trump administration. However, they maintain that the UK has achieved real benefits for businesses, such as lower steel tariffs compared to other nations. "The fact we have 25% steel tariffs, which is lower than the rate for the rest of the world, is a concrete advantage," one official said.

Yet, problems have arisen in carrying out the broader trade deal. Promised quotas on beef exports have not materialized, and the pledge to "reduce steel tariffs to zero" has remains unmet, with tariffs remaining at 25%.

Moving forward, the two sides have agreed to resume talks on the paused tech prosperity deal in January, following what were described as "constructive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.