Several senators on Wednesday lamented the “unfair” and “one-sided” forged trade agreement between President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and United States President Donald Trump. 

Lawmakers also voiced disappointment over the Philippines’ failure to secure more favorable terms on lower export tariffs despite long-standing diplomatic and defense ties with the U.S.—referring to the reported 19 percent export tariff imposed on Philippine goods entering the U.S., compared to zero tariffs on American products coming into the country.

Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson condemned the newly announced trade agreement between the Philippines and the United States, calling it “unfair” and even “insulting.”

Lacson also criticized the stark tariff imbalance under the deal, which imposes a 19 percent duty on Philippine exports to the US, while American goods reportedly enter the Philippine market tariff-free.

“19 percent vs 0 percent tariffs is definitely not the most fair deal between decades-old friends or allies like the United States and the Philippines,” Lacson said in a statement. 

He further slammed the outcome of the negotiations between Marcos and Trump, reflecting a lack of respect for the Philippines.

“If I may add, it is the worst insult that a host can throw at his guest. It is time for us to look for other trade partners,” Lacson said. 

Lopsided trade deal

The President's sister, Sen. Imee Marcos, sees that the new Philippine-U.S. tariff arrangement appears to “heavily favoring” American exports at the expense of Philippine industries.

“Kailangan ko munang makita at mamas and buong kasunduan, pero kahit sinong tanungin, eksperto o karaniwang tao, 19 percent na tarip para sa Pilipinas tacos 0 percent na tarp para sa Amerikano—Paano tayo nanalo diyan? (I still need to see and read the full agreement, but ask anyone—whether an expert or an ordinary person—how is a 19% tariff on Philippine goods versus 0 percent for American goods a win for us?),” she said. 

Meanwhile, Senator Joseph Victor “JV” Ejercito questioned why the Philippines continues to be placed at a disadvantage in trade negotiations with its longtime ally. 

“Masyado tayong dehado (We're at a huge disadvantage). This is grossly disadvantageous to the Philippines. Hanggang ngayon little brown brother pa rin ba ang tingin sa atin? (Do they still see us as the "little brown brother" even today?),” he asked. 

He then expressed frustration over what he described as a recurring pattern of unequal treatment, despite the Philippines' loyalty as a treaty ally.

“Sobra ata tayong dehado. Akala ko ba “little brown brothers” ang turing sa atin ng mga Amerikano? Bakit tila lagi tayong naiisahan sa mga ganitong usapan? Sana ay gawing patas man lang kung tunay na kakampi ang tingin sa atin (We seem to be at a serious disadvantage. I thought the Americans referred to us as their “little brown brothers”? Why do we always seem to get the short end of the stick in talks like these? If they truly see us as an ally, then the least they could do is treat us fairly),” Ejercito added. 

Killing local agri sector

Senator Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri noted that the highly unequal trade arrangement and the disparity in export tariffs could threaten the country's agricultural sector. 

“Parang lugi ata tayo ah, 19 percent ang export tariff natin sa mga filipino products papunta ng U.S. tapos sila walang taripa papasok dito (t looks like we’re at a disadvantage, our export tariff on Filipino products going to the U.S. is 19%, while they can bring their goods here with zero tariffs),” Zubiri lamented. 

According to Zubiri, such an arrangement could flood the local market with cheaper imported goods, including poultry, pork, and beef, threatening the livelihood of Filipino farmers and the survival of the country’s agricultural industries.

“Naku kawawa ata mga magsasaka natin pag bumaha ng manok, baboy at karne dito sa pinas. Baka mamamatay din ang industriya ng mais dito sa atin (Our farmers might really suffer if chicken, pork, and beef from the US start flooding the local market. Our corn industry could even collapse),” he stressed. 

Zubiri also drew comparisons to Japan’s trade terms with the U.S, noting that both countries impose a 15 percent tariff on each other’s goods—something he believes the Philippines should have also pushed for.

“Buti pa ang Japan, 15 percent lang, tapos babayad din ang mga Kano ng 15 percent papasok sa kanila (Japan has it better — just a 15 percent tariff, and the Americans also pay 15 percent to enter their market),” he said. 

He added. “Dapat naman kung tinatrato tayo ng USA bilang treaty ally, eh di ganon na rin sana sa Japan yung nakuha natin na mga taripa (If the U.S. truly treats us as a treaty ally, then we should have gotten the same tariff terms as Japan).”

For his part, Senator Vicente Sotto III offered a more optimistic view, describing the meeting between Marcos and Trump as “most fruitful and productive.”

Trump earlier announced that a new trade deal had been finalized with the Philippines, setting a 19 percent tariff on Philippine goods entering the U.S., while allowing American products to enter the Philippine market tariff-free.

He described Marcos Jr.’s recent visit to Washington, D.C. as “beautiful.” He called the Philippine President a “very good and tough negotiator.”

“It was a beautiful visit, and we concluded our Trade Deal, whereby the Philippines is going open market with the United States, and zero tariffs. The Philippines will pay a 19 percent tariff,” Trump wrote on social media.

The trade deal, however, has sparked backlash among several Philippine lawmakers who criticized the agreement as one-sided and detrimental to local industries.