In a move that has sparked widespread alarm among economists, business leaders, and activists, Bangladesh’s recently signed reciprocal trade agreement with the United States is emerging as a discriminatory pact that disproportionately favors American interests at the expense of national revenue, local industries, and sovereign dignity.
Signed hastily during the final days of the Muhammad Yunus-led interim government on February 9, 2026, the Agreement on Reciprocal Trade (ART) promises minor tariff relief for Bangladeshi exports but imposes sweeping concessions that could drain billions from the economy and entangle the nation in geopolitical dependencies.
With fresh uncertainties arising from a US Supreme Court ruling and ongoing pressure from the Trump administration, experts are calling for its immediate review or outright cancellation to safeguard Bangladesh’s independence and fiscal stability.
The deal, which reduces US tariffs on Bangladeshi goods to 19% (with potential zero rates for textiles using US inputs), comes at a steep price for Dhaka. In exchange, Bangladesh must grant duty-free or phased-zero access to over 6,700 US products, including livestock, chemicals, machinery, and industrial goods—representing immediate zero duties on around 4,500 items. This one-sided arrangement is projected to result in significant revenue losses, as highlighted by the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) in a recent analysis.
According to CPD’s executive director, Dr. Fahmida Khatun, the government could forfeit at least Tk1,327 crore (approximately $108.3 million) in customs duties based on 2024-25 import patterns from the US. “If import trends remain consistent, this represents a minimum revenue shortfall in the future,” Khatun stated during a press conference on March 10, emphasizing that the agreement’s tariff cuts could create risks without reciprocal benefits.
Compounding these economic concerns is the deal’s potential conflict with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. Khatun warned that providing unilateral tariff-free market access to the US might force Bangladesh to extend similar privileges to other WTO members, amplifying revenue erosion and exposing local markets to unfair competition. “This could lead to a cascade effect, where we are compelled to offer the same to all, undermining our trade sovereignty,” she added.
Trump pushes for controversial defense, trade deals in letter to Tarique Rahman
Bangladesh’s reciprocal trade agreement in limbo after US court verdict
CPD’s distinguished fellow, Dr. Mustafizur Rahman, echoed this, stressing the need to plug revenue leaks before imposing new burdens. “Tax evasion and administrative inefficiencies already siphon off a large portion of potential revenue. We must address these gaps digitally and structurally rather than locking into deals that exacerbate deficits,” Rahman said.
The agreement’s vulnerabilities have been further exposed by recent developments in the US. A February 20 Supreme Court ruling invalidated President Donald Trump’s use of emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose broad tariffs, prompting the administration to enact a new 10% global tariff (with threats of escalation to 15%) under alternative trade laws.
This shift has thrown the ART’s foundation into doubt, as the original reciprocal tariffs it addressed may no longer hold, potentially subjecting Bangladeshi exports—particularly ready-made garments, which account for the bulk of US-bound shipments—to higher effective duties. Business leaders like BKMEA President Mohammad Hatem and Employers Federation President Fazle Shamim Ehsan have urged reevaluation, arguing that the deal’s rationale has eroded. “We need restructuring for balance, not cancellation outright, but the one-sided obligations risk flooding our agriculture and manufacturing sectors,” Hatem noted.
Beyond economics, the pact raises profound questions about national dignity and autonomy. Critics point to hidden clauses mandating large-scale purchases of US goods—such as Boeing aircraft, LNG energy, soybeans, and wheat—along with alignment on sanitary and phytosanitary standards that ease entry for US biotech products without rigorous local testing or labeling.
Subsidy restrictions could hamper support for domestic industries, while geopolitical provisions tie Bangladesh to US security measures, limiting deals with third countries like China or Russia that might “harm US interests.” Analyst Kallol Mustafa described it as “a mortgage on our future,” warning that it turns Bangladesh into a subservient partner rather than an equal.
Adding to the pressure, a congratulatory letter from President Trump to Prime Minister Tarique Rahman on February 19 urged “decisive action” to implement the ART and finalize defense pacts like the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) and Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement (ACSA)—agreements previously rejected by the Awami League to preserve strategic independence. This has fueled fears of deepening US influence under the new BNP-led government, seen by some as more amenable to Western alignments. “The Yunus era’s rushed deals sidelined national interests; now, we risk perpetuating subservience,” said senior journalist Probir Kumar Sarker, calling for vigilance against policies that compromise balanced foreign relations.
As Bangladesh grapples with a revenue shortfall already at Tk60,000 crore this fiscal year—far below the 34.5% growth target—the ART’s implementation could intensify challenges, making the 59.4% growth needed in remaining months even more unattainable. Commerce Secretary Mahbubur Rahman acknowledged the need for clarity, stating, “We’re reviewing all aspects in consultation with stakeholders.” A key meeting convened by the Commerce Ministry on March 15 will involve BGMEA, BKMEA, and sector representatives to discuss maintaining, renegotiating, or reassessing the framework amid the evolving US tariff landscape.
In light of these discriminatory elements and the erosion of the deal’s original basis, it is imperative for the government to act with resolve. Upholding national dignity demands a thorough review or, if necessary, cancellation of the ART to prevent long-term economic harm and preserve sovereignty. Diversifying export markets, strengthening diplomacy, and prioritizing balanced partnerships should guide future engagements. Failure to do so risks entrenching a legacy of capitulation, where short-term gains mask enduring vulnerabilities. As Dr. Rahman aptly put it, “Before raising taxes, close the leaks—and that includes leaky international deals.” Bangladesh’s path forward must prioritize self-reliance over unequal alliances.