US President Trump reimposes "maximum pressure" on Iran

US President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed a national security presidential memorandum that aims to apply "maximum pressure" on Iran to, among other objectives, deny the Islamic Republic of developing a nuclear weapon. The memorandum requests the Secretary of State and the US Treasury Department to implement a campaign aimed at driving Iran’s oil exports to zero. The oil market reaction has been muted, as President Trump also indicated he prefers to work out a deal with Iran rather than signing the memorandum.

Hence, given that reluctance, market participants will likely closely watch how the US Treasury Department intends to enforce existing sanctions and if new sanctions are announced, what they may target. On Thursday, the US Treasury Department issued new sanctions targeting, among others, three tankers out of an estimated 280 dark fleet tankers involved in shipping Iranian barrels. It is unclear how the sanctions will affect Iranian oil exports or the impact on buyers of said oil.

Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei said on Friday it would be "unwise and dishonorable" to negotiate with the United States, but did not rule out the possibility of talks. He also added it was the current US president who chose to break the previous nuclear deal. So it remains unclear whether the two parties are willing to negotiate a new deal.

Oil market participants will likely keep a close eye on whether the US Treasury Department makes further announcements over the coming weeks. While January crude exports from Iran look to have been lower than in previous months, it remains unclear how buyers of Iranian barrels will react to the new US administration. Imports of Iranian barrels in China seem to be falling, while Iranian crude stored on tankers (so-called floating storage) is rising. This indicates that while Iranian exports haven't been significantly disrupted, there is some reluctance to buy those barrels. We continue to expect that Iranian crude exports may get somewhat disrupted over the coming months.

We also remain surprised that market participants still react to President Trump's comments when it comes to bringing down oil prices. On Thursday, he said the US will have "more liquid gold coming out of the ground" and that will drive the price of oil down. But there is currently no indication of accelerating US drilling activity. We expect only muted US crude production growth in 2025. The only certainty to us is that comments from President Trump will continue to drive volatility in the oil market.

FAQs on tariffs

Equities had a volatile start to the week after the Trump administration pushed forward with plans to impose higher tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China over the weekend. The S&P 500 closed down 0.8% on Monday.

But this was a smaller decline than futures had initially indicated. Sentiment partially recovered after news that the threatened tariff hikes on Mexico would be delayed by at least a month following concessions on border security and enforcement. Later, Canada announced a similar pause after it revealed its own incremental border control measures and funding pledges.

These delays revived hopes that President Trump's tariff threats may be more negotiable than previously thought. While no such deal has emerged to forestall the 10% incremental tariff on Chinese imports, which are now technically in effect, China's response was viewed as relatively muted—including 10-15% levies on US energy and agricultural tools. The measured nature of China's retaliation appeared intended to avoid further escalation. The Hang Seng Index closed 2.8% higher.

But uncertainty remains high. Here are some answers to frequently asked questions we have been receiving from investors:

1. Why is President Trump targeting these countries?

The US president has long stated his enthusiasm for tariffs. But some of his initial targets have come as a surprise—with an additional 25% tariff for neighbors Canada and Mexico. China, a more long-standing trade rival, has also been included, though at a lower additional rate of 10%. The White House has said this reflects a desire to hold these nations “accountable to their promises of halting illegal immigration and stopping poisonous fentanyl and other drugs from flowing into our country.” It is notable that concessions on border control from Mexico and Canada have been sufficient to delay the implementation of tariffs.

The administration has also cited the bilateral trade deficits the US runs with these nations, which President Trump has said are evidence of unfair practices. President Trump has also threatened to impose tariffs on the European Union, having criticized the trade bloc for the scale of its trade surplus with the US.

2. How significant is trade with China, Mexico, and Canada for the US economy?

The US is a relatively self-sufficient economy, with a relatively low reliance on foreign trade by international standards. Imports account for around 14% of US GDP, as of the latest full year of data from 2023. However, China, Canada, and Mexico account for 43% of those imports.

Even this number may understate the importance of trade flows between the US and its neighbors. For example, a component for a US auto may cross the border with Mexico many times during assembly. If each move across the border were to trigger a 25% tariff for the US automaker, the supply chain would need to be adjusted.

3. Why would energy face a lower tariff rate? Isn’t the US energy independent anyway?

The US is a net exporter of both petroleum and natural gas. However, oil varies in consistency and refineries are configured to process different types of crude. Prior to the US shale revolution—which boosted US production of light oil—many US refineries were set up to process heavy oil, much of which is imported from Canada. As a result, high tariffs on Canadian crude would push up the politically sensitive price of gasoline, especially in the Midwest.

4. Are these tariffs just a threat or the start of a new normal?

This should become clear over the coming weeks and months. Last-minute reprieves for Colombia, Mexico, and Canada provide some hope that President Trump is using tariffs as a negotiating tool rather than a permanent fixture of economic policy. The administration also came under pressure from business groups to avoid a confrontation with Canada and Mexico. The National Manufacturers’ Association wrote that its members “understand the need to deal with any sort of crisis that involves illicit drugs crossing our border,” but also feels “protecting manufacturing gains that have come from our strong North American partnership is vital.” In our view, the president is unlikely to want to alienate key constituencies in his voter and funding base.

5. Can we learn anything from factors that led to changes in tariff policies during Trump’s first term?

Various potential lessons can be learned from Trump’s first term. It is notable that the momentum of higher tariffs against Chinese imports was slowed after the nation agreed to step up purchases of US goods.

That said, the start of the second term has been different from the first term, and the mindset of the administration could be different this time. The key will be whether Trump has become convinced that tariffs are worthwhile in and of themselves, and not just a bargaining tool. This might become clearer in the coming weeks.

6. Are there ways to avoid these tariffs for businesses and consumers?

Global trade patterns can be rerouted over time to avert tariffs. After the first-term tariffs against China, China rerouted about a third of its exports to the US. That is not practical for Mexico and Canada, however, for simple reasons of geography. Also, some of China’s rerouting went via Mexico and Canada and could now be subject to tariffs.

The higher the tariff rates, the more incentive there will be to take actions such as moving factories from China to neighboring low-wage countries. Of course, moving production to the US would be one way to avoid tariffs and the best outcome from the president’s viewpoint, but we are skeptical that there will be significant "onshoring." Wages in the US are high, and retaliatory tariffs could make it difficult to export from any newly built factories in the US.

7. What would be the effect on US growth and inflation if the tariffs do remain in place?

The effect of a prolonged retaliatory exchange of tariffs is stagflationary—meaning that prices would experience a one-off increase, while we estimate expected growth would slow 80-100 basis points. As it stands, our base case is a scenario of “selective tariffs,” which have the potential to dent, but not derail, US economic growth.

8. How about the impact on China, Mexico, and Canada?

The prolonged imposition of tariffs may be enough to push the Canadian and Mexican economies into recession while also representing a sizable inflationary shock. The depreciation of their currencies as trade "shock absorbers" could mitigate some tariff-related shock to exports, but also reduces their international purchasing power. Mexico was already grappling with an economic slowdown, with GDP growth of just 1% expected in 2025 prior to the tariff announcement.

9. What does it mean for global trade and global growth? Is the risk of a recession rising?

Aggressive US tariffs would almost certainly trigger retaliation by US trading partners, and there are risks of a tit-for-tat ratcheting up of tariffs. Policy uncertainty is unusually high, which is damaging to global growth since it is difficult for businesses and consumers to make plans. The US and China are unlikely to suffer recessions even if tariffs prove significant, but other countries that are more reliant on bilateral trade with the US, especially Canada and Mexico, could be more vulnerable. Overall, we still think a global recession remains unlikely.

10. How should I invest considering the uncertainty?

Investors should prepare for market volatility and potential policy surprises by considering portfolio diversification and hedging approaches.

Navigate political risks. More volatile markets require an increased focus on portfolio diversification and hedging approaches. In equities, capital preservation strategies can potentially help limit portfolio losses. As volatility and skew are low relative to current levels of uncertainty, mean-reversion strategies can also be an effective way to harness higher volatility. We like high-quality government and investment grade corporate bonds, as they offer appealing yields, some insulation against uncertainty, and can help diversify portfolios.

More to go in equities. Although we will continue to monitor trade policy closely, our base case remains for the S&P 500 to rise to 6,600 by year-end. If implemented, tariffs on Canada and Mexico are unlikely to be sustained, resilient US economic growth should support stocks, and we continue to believe that AI presents a powerful structural tailwind for earnings and equity markets. We believe that the recent development of DeepSeek, a lower-cost AI model, will lead to even broader proliferation of AI, enhancing growth and productivity.

Harvest currency volatility. Changes to trade policy can particularly impact currency markets, providing investors an opportunity to use volatility spikes to boost portfolio income. Over the next one to three months, and while trade uncertainty remains particularly elevated, we like picking up yield by selling the risks of a rally in EURUSD and of a fall in USDCHF. Over the next six months, we like selling the risk of gains in the CHFJPY, the EURGBP, and the EURAUD exchange rates, and selling the risk of declines in the GBPUSD, the GBPCHF, and the AUDUSD crosses.

Eurozone: EU tariffs will “definitely happen”

President Donald Trump has so far been true to his word, with trade taxes (tariffs) about to be imposed on Canada, Mexico (delayed by a month), and China. Governments, businesses, and consumers in Europe will have no doubt heard the president’s threat that tariffs on the EU will “definitely happen,” too. Even the UK, which has a negligible goods trade balance with the US, has been singled out by the president as being “way out of line.”

The threat of tariffs has been looming since the election, and the EU and European governments have been preparing for this possibility. To be sure, Europe enjoys a large surplus in traded goods with the US across a range of industries. President Trump often cites a USD 300bn deficit in his speeches, but in terms of the overall footprint on the economy, notwithstanding the fact that the US is the most important export market for the bloc (Fig. 1), the numbers are a lot less dramatic. For the Eurozone, goods exports to the US are around 3% of GDP, and imports are close to 2%. Thus, the economic impact from the imposition of tariffs would be relatively small.

Fig. 1: The US is the euro area’s largest single export market. Domestic value added in exports, partner shares (%). Source: OECD, UBS, as of February 2025.

However, what these estimates don’t show is the impact on sentiment in Europe. If companies decide to slow investment and pause hiring, and consumers respond by saving more and spending less, the impact on the economy is likely to be much bigger than suggested by the trade numbers alone. Another consideration is the impact of US trade taxes on other countries, notably China. If trade is redirected away from the US toward the Eurozone, without offsetting measures from the EU, it could lead to lower prices for imported goods—which would compound the disinflationary trends already under way. Finally, US tariffs could also harm growth globally, including in the US itself, which would weigh on EU exports. A weaker euro against the USD would, in our view, only partially offset these effects.

In our base case, we assume US tariffs on select European goods are likely to come into force in the second half of this year, and this is one of the reasons for our slightly below consensus forecasts of 0.9% GDP growth this year for the region. However, the speed and hard line shown by the president to his closest neighbors raises the threat that a trade dispute with Europe could happen sooner. In our view, this increases the downside risks to Eurozone growth and inflation in the coming quarters.

We currently look for the European Central Bank (ECB) to continue cutting rates by 25 basis points at every meeting in the first half of the year, only pausing when the deposit rate reaches the 2% neutral level. In our view, developments with regard to US trade policy in recent days only increase the risk that the ECB will have to take interest rates even lower to support the economy.

For EMEA-based investors, we recommend they continue to implement strategies that can help portfolios Navigate political risks by considering portfolio diversification and hedging approaches. Volatility in FX markets is an opportunity to enhance portfolio yields by Harvesting currency volatility. Finally, lower rates in the Eurozone with the possibility of more cuts than we foresee emphasize the need to Lock in yields.

Tariff turmoil engulfs Mexico

What happened?

The Trump administration has imposed a 25% tariff on all imports from Mexico and most imports from Canada, along with an additional 10% duty on all imports from China, effective 4 February. The executive order cites a national emergency due to “the extraordinary threat posed by illegal aliens and drugs” as the justification for these measures.

In response, Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum has directed the economy minister to implement a plan that includes both tariff and non-tariff retaliatory measures. Sheinbaum is expected to announce the details of her plan early Monday.

Our view

In our base case, we anticipate that Mexico will adopt a pragmatic and cooperative approach, delivering a measured retaliatory response.

We do not foresee the US's 25% tariff on Mexico remaining in place for an extended period of time, as this would be akin to cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face.

Given that Mexico and Canada together account for approximately 30% of total US trade, permanent tariffs would pose significant economic risks to the US itself, thereby carrying political repercussions for the Trump administration.

The economic fallout would be substantial, manifesting as higher costs for businesses, inflationary pressures, and potential job losses in industries reliant on North American supply chains. This move is likely to encounter fierce opposition and lobbying efforts from certain industry groups, as well as legal challenges.

Similar to what happened during the recent Colombian tariff saga, the tariffs may pave the way for a deal, potentially including an early renegotiation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), rather than waiting for the review in 2026.

However, the risk that these tariffs could become more permanent is real. US President Donald Trump has linked tariffs to trade deficits, which are not easily “negotiated” away. Unlike other issues such as border control, trade imbalances are more structural, driven by factors that extend far beyond tariff policy, and can take considerable time to adjust.

Impact on the Mexican economy

Mexico was already grappling with an economic slowdown, with GDP growth expected at just 1% in 2025 prior to the tariff announcement. The 25% US tariff could potentially push the country into a recession, depending on its duration.

The USD 800 billion annual trade relationship between Mexico and the US underscores the depth of their economic interdependence. Mexico’s economy is highly open and deeply reliant on the US, making it particularly vulnerable to trade disruptions. For instance, some car components cross the border multiple times before the vehicle is finally assembled, meaning even short-lived tariffs could lead to significant supply chain disruptions.

In the longer term, we remain optimistic about North America’s economic integration and competitiveness. Over the past three decades, interconnected supply chains and cross-border infrastructure have strengthened the region’s industrial base, making economic decoupling unlikely.

Most critically, the US cannot de-risk from both China and Mexico simultaneously without severely disrupting its own economy. Many of the intermediate goods supplied by Mexico are essential for American manufacturing competitiveness.

Yet, we acknowledge that Trump may be steering the US toward a dramatically different direction. Uncertainty regarding international trade could become a constant over the next four years. In such a scenario, economic growth trends, financial market stability, and historical geo-economic alliances would face significant challenges.

Investment implications

The USDMXN exchange rate was trading moderately weaker around 21.25 at the time of writing. Such a level does not fully price in the associated risks, in our view. Investors should consider hedging or avoiding MXN exposure in the near term.

While Mexico’s sovereign US dollar-denominated bonds are already trading at wider spreads compared to similarly-rated sovereigns, spreads may widen further in the near term as investors price in the likelihood of a further decline in Mexico’s credit fundamentals due to the impact of tariffs. This comes at a time when Mexico's credit outlook is already deteriorating, influenced by recent constitutional reforms and concerns about the fiscal consolidation this year. We maintain a neutral stance on Mexico’s sovereign US dollar bonds, but we believe the longer end of the yield curve remains the most vulnerable.

Despite likely higher volatility, we think Mexican corporate issuers under our coverage are likely to remain resilient due to significant operations overseas, world-class management teams with a proven track record in handling challenging environments, liquid balance sheets, and healthy leverage ratios.

Fig. 1: The US and Mexican economies are joined at the hip. Trade value in 2023. Source: International Trade Administration, UBS.

CIO Alert: Trump presses ahead with tariffs

What happened?

The Trump administration has signed executive orders to impose an additional 25% tariff on most imports from Canada and Mexico, as well as an additional 10% duty on all imports from China, citing a national emergency over “the extraordinary threat posed by illegal aliens and drugs.” Duties levied on Canadian “energy resources” will face a lower 10% tariff, although Mexican energy imports will face the full 25%. President Donald Trump also reiterated a threat to hike tariffs on the European Union, citing the “tremendous deficit” with the EU. He also said that he would “eventually” put tariffs on semiconductors, steel, copper, aluminum, and pharmaceuticals.

In response, Canada's government has announced a 25% tariff on some US imports, starting with CAD 30bn worth of US goods on 4 February, to be followed by another CAD 125bn added in 21 days’ time. Canada is also said to be considering several additional measures, including restrictions on critical mineral and energy exports. Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum has also ordered retaliatory measures, and China's foreign minister has vowed to take “necessary countermeasures,” though neither provided additional details.

At the time of writing, S&P 500 futures are down 1.7%.

What do we think?

In our Monthly Letter: Prepare for Trump 2.0, we said that “aggressive” tariffs by the US, including 30% effective tariffs on Chinese imports and selective tariffs against EU imports, were within our base case scenario. We also said that such tariffs would be insufficient to derail US economic growth. However, we also said that tariffs against Canada and Mexico, if sustained, have the potential to inflict a “tariff shock” to US growth and risk higher US inflation, as Mexico and Canada together account for about 30% of the US’s total trade.

In our base case, we do not expect the 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico to be sustained for a prolonged period. The Trump administration would not want to jeopardize US economic growth or risk higher inflation by leaving the tariffs in place for a sustained period, and significant stock market volatility could lead to a change in approach. We would expect industry groups representing companies on the northern and southern borders to file court challenges and lobby for their removal. It is also possible that the tariffs against Canada and Mexico are merely a tactic to accelerate a renegotiation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which is a free trade pact between the countries. The significant potential economic effect of the tariffs on Mexico and Canada may ultimately lead to concessions, even if their initial response has been to announce retaliation.

At the same time, Trump's comments on Friday, which suggested that the tariffs were “purely economic,” linking them to the US’s bilateral trade deficits, are more concerning, in our view. Deficits cannot easily be "negotiated" in the same way as non-trade issues like migration and drug control. Meanwhile, we continue to believe that the US effective tariff rate in China will eventually rise to 30% (from the current 11%), even if Trump’s recent more diplomatic tone with China suggests the White House may believe it has something to gain from the more gradual approach.

In the weeks ahead, tariffs are likely to represent an overhang on markets and contribute to volatility, at least until investors gain greater clarity on the path and destination of US trade policy.

In the very near term, the period between now and implementation on Tuesday could provide a brief window for negotiation or compromise. Thereafter, we believe US Customs and Border Protection may need some weeks to implement the tariffs (based on the experience of tariffs imposed in 2018 and 2019), providing a potential further window for negotiation. Another key date is 1 April, the deadline for federal agencies to report back their findings on persistent trade deficits and “unfair” trade policies—a report which could be a catalyst for additional tariffs. Earlier last week, the Financial Times reported that US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is proposing a gradualist approach on universal tariffs, starting at 2.5%, with a monthly step-up of 2.5 percentage points until they reach as high as 20%, while Trump had singled out tariffs on computer chips, medicine, and metal imports.

How to invest?

Navigate political risks. More volatile markets require an increased focus on portfolio diversification and hedging approaches. In equities, capital preservation strategies can help manage downside risks. As volatility and skew are low relative to current levels of uncertainty, mean reversion strategies can also be an effective way to harness higher volatility. We like high grade and investment grade bonds, as they offer some insulation against uncertainty and can help diversify portfolios. Separately, we believe long USDCNY could be an effective hedge against trade risks, while CAD and MXN long exposure should be hedged or avoided in the near term. Gold also remains an effective hedge against geopolitical and inflation risks, in our view. For investors willing and able to manage risks inherent in alternatives, we also think certain hedge fund strategies are well positioned to offer attractive riskadjusted returns and portfolio resilience during market volatility.

More to go in equities. Although we will continue to monitor trade policy closely, our base case remains for the S&P 500 to rise to 6,600 by year-end. Tariffs on Canada and Mexico are unlikely to be sustained, US economic growth should represent a tailwind for stocks, and we continue to believe that AI presents a powerful structural tailwind for earnings and equity markets. We believe that the recent development of DeepSeek, a lower cost AI model, will ultimately lead to even broader proliferation of AI, enhancing growth and productivity.

Harvest currency volatility. Changes to trade policy are likely to be keenly felt in currency markets, providing investors an opportunity to use volatility spikes to boost portfolio income. Over the next one to three months, and while trade uncertainty remains particularly elevated, we like picking up yield by selling the upside in the EURUSD and downside in the USDCHF. Over the next six months, we like selling the upside in the CHFJPY, the EURGBP, and the EURAUD, and the downside in the GBPUSD, the GBPCHF, and the AUDUSD. While the US dollar has room to strengthen in the near term, we expect it to give up its gains over the balance of 2025.

UBS Trending: Post-inauguration recap—what might happen to the markets

Trade wars, tariff threats, and trillion-dollar tax cuts—Trump 2.0’s economic agenda is taking shape. But here’s what markets might be missing: 2025’s economic story could be unlike anything we’ve seen before.

CIO Alert: President Trump unveils second-term agenda

What happened?

Donald Trump has been sworn in as the 47th President of the United States. In a wide-ranging inaugural address, President Trump made pledges on issues ranging from free speech to ownership of the Panama Canal. From an economic perspective, the agenda he laid out was in line with campaign promises, with pledges to bring down inflation, boost energy production, and levy tariffs on imports.

Press reports citing an administration official indicated that President Trump would issue a broad memorandum directing federal agencies to investigate persistent trade deficits and address unfair trade and currency policies by other countries. The memo singled out China’s compliance with the 2020 trade deal and the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which is set for review in 2026, as particular areas for scrutiny.

US equity and bond markets were closed on Monday for the Martin Luther King Jr. Day public holiday. However, S&P 500 futures rose by 0.4% and the US dollar index was down 1.2% at the time of writing, apparently on initial relief that President Trump had not issued executive orders imposing tariffs on his first day in office.

What do we expect?

President Trump’s policy agenda—if enacted in its entirety—would have significant macroeconomic repercussions. However, financial and political constraints are likely to mean that enacted policy risks falling short of campaign pledges in some instances. There is also the consideration that the President may “escalate to deescalate,” with some of his proposals likely to prove to be negotiating tactics.

For example, the President declared a national emergency at the southern border and stated that the process of returning illegal immigrants would begin immediately. However, funding is currently not available for such a program, and reducing the labor supply through deportation could contribute to higher inflation.

President Trump also pledged to increase oil production and fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). But the level of oil production is largely controlled by private companies, and there is currently no clear sign of changes in capital spending or drilling activity because of the election. Filling the SPR, meanwhile, would require additional funding from Congress, and there are physical constraints on how quickly it can be filled.

Where the President enjoys more leeway is in the use of executive authority to impose tariffs on imports. Today’s use of a memorandum proposing scrutiny of current practices rather than the immediate imposition of fresh tariffs has reassured markets in the short term. But we believe it would be premature to assume that eventual new taxes on imports will be limited in size or scope.

In our base case, we expect the effective tariff rate on China to rise to 25-30% (from 10% currently). We also expect measures to protect technological interests, rules limiting transshipment, and tariffs on EU autos and pharmaceuticals. Possible retaliations by China could include reciprocal tariffs, weakening the Chinese yuan, and restricting critical mineral exports.

A risk case would include some combination of the imposition of universal tariffs on all US imports, particularly high tariffs on China (e.g., 60%), and/or meaningful and sustained tariffs on the US’s neighbors—Mexico and Canada.

How do we invest?

Our base case for the US economy is for “growth despite tariffs.” While we will be closely monitoring for risks, we do not believe that the tariff measures outlined in our base case would be sufficient to derail US growth. Nor do we believe that such tariffs would preclude inflation continuing to fall from current levels, enabling the Federal Reserve to cut rates by 50bps later this year.

Tariff risks, US fiscal policy concerns, and shifting expectations around inflation and Fed policy are likely to keep equity markets volatile in the near term. But we believe it is most likely that a combination of resilient US economic activity, solid earnings growth, lower borrowing costs, and the potential for greater capital markets activity will lead stocks higher over the balance of 2025. In our base case, we see the S&P 500 reaching 6,600 by December.

Meanwhile, long-end rates have moved higher since the US election owing to a repricing of Fed rate-cutting expectations and fiscal concerns. Yields have come off their peak in recent days, but we believe they still offer an attractive entry point to lock in yields. We favor high-quality segments, particularly government and investment grade bonds. In our base case, we expect the 10-year Treasury yield to fall to 4% in 2025.

In currencies, elevated investor positioning and the dollar’s high valuation mean that we still see potential for dollar weakness over the balance of 2025. However, robust US economic data and ongoing uncertainty around the extent and nature of tariffs appear likely to keep the currency strong in the near term. In our base case, we forecast EURUSD at 1.02 in June and 1.06 in December.

UBS Trending: What does Trump’s election win mean for business owners?

Trump's return to DC promises an economic rush—tax cuts, spending plans, and a more business-friendly regulatory environment. As this high-stakes economic experiment unfolds, what's the year ahead going to look like for business owners?

UBS Trending: What might Trump's first 100 days look like?

The United States is preparing for Donald Trump’s second turn at bat. With cabinet picks arriving at record speed and an agenda built on four years of reflection, what will the first 100 days look like?

Related reports

Get in touch

Together, we can help you pursue what’s important