Trump insisted "very bad things" are taking place in South Africa. However, Steenhuisen said the situation on the ground in South Africa is different from what Trump believes.

"Well, I think that certainly what is happening in South Africa does not (have) resemblance to what Mr Trump may think is happening. Let me be clear, there is no widespread expropriation of property in South Africa, there is no genocide in South Africa.

"I think what we are seeing is a response to a number of years of poor policy decisions, bad legislation and bad positioning publicly which has got us into the crosshairs of the Trump administration. We can't change who sits in the White House, that is beyond our control, but we can manage how we navigate these next four years," said Steenhuisen.

In imposing the heavy tariffs, Trump also claimed South Africa has been “ripping off” US taxpayers and insisted Pretoria imposes 60% tariffs on American goods.

However, this claim is false.

Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.

Just days before announcing the tariffs, Trump’s own administration released its 2025 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, which contradicts his assertion.

The report found that “South Africa’s average Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) applied tariff rate is just 7.6% — with 7.4% for non-agricultural products and 8.5% for agricultural products”. It further noted that tariffs of 60% or more are applied only to niche agricultural products bound under WTO rules — such as sugar or dairy — and are rarely levied on actual US exports to South Africa.

Moreover, South Africa’s tariff structure is aligned with WTO norms. A total of 93.8% of its tariff lines are bound, providing predictability and transparency.

So how did Trump justify the 30% tariff on South Africa?

The new tariff rates were calculated using what Trump calls a “reciprocal trade formula”. In essence: if a country exports more to the US than it imports from it, the surplus is treated as a form of exploitation — or, in Trump’s words, “pillaging”.

Using this formula, the Trump administration took the trade deficit, divided it by the value of US imports from each country, and used that figure to justify a reciprocal tariff.

In South Africa’s case, a trade surplus — largely in cars, platinum, and citrus — became the basis for Trump’s 60% claim.

IOL