Washington: US President Donald Trump has said he ordered an additional nine per cent increase in tariffs on Switzerland after a phone conversation with a senior Swiss leader, claiming he was unhappy with her tone while she urged him to reconsider the duty hike. His remarks, made during a television interview, have triggered fresh discussion around trade diplomacy and tariff decision-making.
Speaking to Fox Business, Trump said he initially imposed a 30 per cent tariff on Swiss goods but later increased it to 39 per cent following what he described as a difficult call from Swiss Federal Councillor Karin Keller-Sutter. During the interview, he mistakenly referred to her as the Prime Minister of Switzerland, though the country is governed by a seven-member Federal Council and does not have a prime minister.
Trump describes call as “aggressive but nice”
According to Trump, the Swiss leader repeatedly requested that the tariff be rolled back, stressing that Switzerland is a small country and could not absorb such high duties. He characterised her approach as persistent and forceful.
“I put on a 30 per cent tariff, which is very low. Then I got an emergency call from, I believe, the Prime Minister of Switzerland, and she was very aggressive but nice but very aggressive,” Trump said in the interview.
He added that he found the conversation repetitive and said it influenced his decision to raise the tariff instead of lowering it. Trump stated that he considered Switzerland’s trade position with the United States before finalising the revised rate.
Trade deficit cited as justification
Trump said he told the Swiss representative that although Switzerland is geographically small, it runs a large trade surplus with the United States. He placed that figure at about USD 42 billion and argued that tariff measures were justified to correct the imbalance.
He also claimed that Swiss exporters were paying little or no tariff while selling goods into the American market, describing the situation as unfair to US producers. His comments align with his long-held position that tariffs are an effective tool to rebalance trade relationships and push trading partners toward new agreements.
Trade analysts note that trade deficit figures can vary depending on whether only goods or both goods and services are counted, and final official numbers are typically published by government statistical agencies.
Similar remarks made earlier at Davos
Trump had made similar references to the Swiss leadership during earlier public remarks at the World Economic Forum in Davos, where he appeared uncertain about Switzerland’s political structure and again mentioned receiving a call from a woman leader objecting to tariff levels.
At that time too, he said the caller emphasised that Switzerland was a small country and could not manage steep duties, while he responded that the size of the economy mattered more than geography when it came to trade balances.
Switzerland’s federal system distributes executive authority across seven Federal Councillors, who collectively function as the national government. The presidency rotates annually among them and is largely ceremonial in nature.
Preliminary tariff understanding reported
Despite the sharp tone described in Trump’s interview, US and Swiss negotiators have reportedly worked on a preliminary understanding aimed at lowering tariff rates. According to details referenced in recent reports, the proposed framework would bring the tariff level down to around 15 per cent.
As part of that understanding, Swiss industry groups are said to have committed to invest about USD 200 billion in the United States by the end of 2028. Such investment pledges are often tied to broader trade and market-access negotiations and typically proceed in phases.
Neither side has yet released a full formal text of a final tariff settlement, and officials have indicated that discussions are ongoing.
Diplomacy and tariffs intertwined
Trump’s comments highlight how personal diplomacy and trade policy can intersect, especially under an approach that emphasises leader-to-leader negotiation. Former trade officials say tariff decisions are usually based on structured assessments by commerce and trade departments, but political leadership can influence timing and scale.
Critics argue that linking tariff levels to the tone of diplomatic conversations risks adding unpredictability to global trade. Supporters counter that tough negotiation tactics can extract stronger concessions and faster outcomes.
Conclusion
The US President’s account of his call with a Swiss leader and the resulting tariff increase has added a new dimension to the ongoing trade conversation between the two countries. While negotiations toward a reduced rate and higher Swiss investment are reportedly in motion, the episode underscores how trade policy, diplomacy, and leadership style continue to shape tariff outcomes.