Return to Transcripts main page
Quest Means Business
President Set To Unveil Sweeping New Tariffs On Wednesday; Florida Voters To Fill Vacant U.S. House Seats; U.S. Justice Department To Seek Death Penalty For Mangione; Trump Set To Unveil Sweeping New Tariffs On Wednesday; China Launches Joint Exercises Around Taiwan; Candidates Make Their Case To Lead U.N. Tourism Body. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired April 01, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:02]
RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Closing bell ringing on Wall street. Diana Shipping ringing the closing bell today and
the day has been betwixt and between, if you're going to see the way the markets have been moving. We had a bit of green at one particular point,
but then we went back into the red. It is a sort of a wait and see for obvious reasons. We know what's happening. The gavel gets hit. One, oh,
that's a very firm, strong gavel. The day is over. Those are the markets and the events that we are going to be talking about.
The slew of tariffs, which will take effect immediately, says the White House as of tomorrow. Ursula von der Leyen says Europe has prepared a
strong response.
China launches military drills from multiple directions around Taiwan.
The U.S. government will seek the death penalty for the accused CEO killer, Luigi Mangione.
Live from New York. It is April the first. No April Fool's today, I'm afraid. I'm Richard Quest, and on April 1st, of course, I mean business.
Good evening.
This time tomorrow, Donald Trump is set to announce his long awaited details of the tariff policy on the rest of the world. Mr. Trump has
reportedly settled on a plan, he just hasn't told everybody about it.
So as of this morning, several of his close advisers remained in the dark on the details. On the table, everything from reciprocal tariffs, tit-for-
tat to across the board duties on everybody at the same level and according to the U.S. administration, they will take effect immediately.
The White House Press Secretary says that the administration is putting the finishing touches.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The President said last night he has made a decision and a determination. I was with him in the
Oval Office earlier and he is going to announce that decision tomorrow. I don't want to get ahead of the President. This is obviously a very big day.
He is with his trade and tariff team right now, perfecting it to make sure this is a perfect deal for the American people and the American worker, and
you will all find out in about 24 hours from now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Kevin is with me. It is our nightly chat, Kevin, as we go deeper into the labyrinth of tariffs. Have you any idea what we are getting
tomorrow.
KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: At this point no, Richard, I don't, but I could tell you some of the options that --
QUEST: Please.
LIPTAK: -- the President is weighing. The most extreme option right now seems to be this universal 20 percent tariff on all imports, on all
American trading partners. This is obviously, you know, quite an extreme option. It is something that's being pushed by the hawkish side of the
President's table, people like Peter Navarro. This would be essentially an enormous tax cut on the American people. In Navarro's own telling, raise
potentially $6 trillion over the next decade. So it does give you a sense of permanence on that plan.
On the other side of the table, you have more of a true reciprocal tariff, essentially a dollar for dollar tariff on any country that applies duties
on American exports that could potentially be negotiated up or down, and you hear people like Kevin Hassett talking about that plan.
And I think those two contrasting ideas just gives you a sense of what the President is looking at.
QUEST: So besides this, we've also got the auto tariffs which are due to come in. Now my understanding is they are additive. So they're on top of
whatever else comes in or have I got this the wrong way around?
LIPTAK: No, that's right. They will be on top of whatever the President decides to do in terms of the reciprocal tariffs, but these 25 percent auto
tariffs are set to go into effect this week. The President already announced them and it will have the biggest effect on Canada and Mexico
because of all the auto parts that they make for -- even for cars that are assembled in the U.S.
QUEST: And my understanding, I mean, no exemptions. I know the British are expecting it to happen. The E.U. is preparing for it, but at the moment
nobody seems to be getting off.
LIPTAK: That's what they say, for now that there are no exemptions. But I think it will all depend on what the President ultimately decides to do. If
he does put in place these dollar for dollar tariffs, you know, part of the plan behind those is that it would be able to go up or down, depending on
what they decided to do. And that is, you know, ultimately what the President's objective here is to start a negotiation.
QUEST: Now, Kevin, just to put this in perspective from the administration's point of view, from the President's point of view, this is
something he believes in passionately. I suppose you and I can go backwards and forwards on the mechanisms, the executions, the on off, up and down.
But the core idea of tariffs, tariffs, tariffs is not something that is just a wisp in the willow or that he came up with yesterday. He has
believed this all his adult life.
[16:05:10]
LIPTAK: Yes, This is fundamental to his entire view of the global economy. He has been talking about it for literally 40 years.
QUEST: Right.
LIPTAK: He talked about it on the campaign trail. He says this is the word he loves the most. But I think it is important to note that his objectives
on these tariffs are contradictory in a lot of ways. On one side of the coin, he wants to realign the entire global economy to benefit American
workers.
On the other side of the coin, he wants to bring in billions of dollars in revenue for the United States. And in a lot of ways, if he is successful on
the first point, he is successful on trying to realign the global economy.
QUEST: Exactly.
LIPTAK: He won't be bringing in the revenue that he needs, for example, to pay for the tax cuts that he wants to sign into effect later this year. And
so whatever plan he decides to do tomorrow, one of those ideas will have to get left off to the side because he really can't do both, and I think
that's the competing objectives that he is hearing from his advisers as he tries to make this final decision.
QUEST: Brilliantly put. Grateful. Thank you Kevin. Kevin Liptak at the White House. We've got a busy day tomorrow, so gird your loins and lots of
coffee. Thank you, sir.
Now the European Union is warning it has a strong plan for retaliating against the Trump tariffs. The Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen,
said while the bloc would prefer to negotiate a trade deal, if tariffs are imposed, it will come to the table from a position of strength.
Cecilia Malmstrom is the former E.U. Trade Commissioner. Now, the senior fellow at The Peterson Institute for International Economics. The Peterson
Institute knows more than enough that is honest or decent about tariffs and trade, and have been doing all the marvelous research on it.
Cecilia, good to see you. You join us from Sweden.
The reality is yes, I know nobody benefits from tariffs. But the reality is these are coming. Do you think the E.U. is properly prepared?
CECILIA MALMSTROM IS THE FORMER E.U. TRADE COMMISSIONER: Well, I think we've had -- good evening, everybody. Nice to be here again.
I think the E.U. is quite prepared. This has been in the making for quite some time. We have heard President Trump's statement during the campaign,
and also in his first weeks. So there has been a team working on different scenarios in the Commission. We don't know exactly what will come out
tomorrow, but there will be counter-tariffs or countermeasures, depending on what comes out, of course.
We have first the steel and aluminum tariffs. We have the car and car parts tariffs and then what will come tomorrow. So unfortunately the E.U. will
have to retaliate and it will be in the form of counter-tariffs and then maybe something else depending on what's on the table.
QUEST: The U.S. has a bit of a point on things like cars, whether it is a straightforward the tariff of eight percent or whatever the number is,
which is higher than what the U.S. does, quid pro quo or its non-tariff barriers. The E.U. has not played fair with the U.S. when it comes to
automobiles.
MALMSTROM: Well, that is the claim of President Trump. It is true that the E.U. tariffs on cars is 10 percent towards the whole world. It has
negotiated in the WTO, and it applies to all the countries with whom we do not have trade agreements -- U.S., India, China and others. And the U.S.
has only 2.5 percent.
But if you compare, for instance, lorries and trucks, we have six percent, the U.S. has 25 percent, so on average the tariffs are rather low between
us. But there are some goods where they are higher on one side and lower on the other side. And this could of course be negotiated.
Many years ago we tried to do a trade agreement. It was called TTIP, and the aim was to get rid of tariffs as much as possible, but also to see what
we can do on what you just referred to the non-tariff barriers, standards and licenses and such things.
QUEST: Right. I just wonder at what point is the E.U. going to say, you know, we are -- obviously, the U.S. is still a major trading partner, but
we do need to build better trade relations, for example, with China or with South America. I mean, yes, they've been doing it, but it has always been
overshadowed by the U.S. and now the U.S. can no longer, in some views, be regarded as a reliable ally.
MALMSTROM: Well, the transatlantic partnership has been severely damaged lately, not only because of trade, but also because of the President's
views and the administration's views on Ukraine. But U.S. and Europe are very important trading partners. This has been beneficial for all of us.
It has created jobs and growth on both sides of the Atlantic. But it is true the E.U. has also other friends, and I think it will step up. It has
more trade -- free trade agreements than any other country in the world, and I think it will step up when you said Mercosur, the countries of Latin
America, with Mexico, with India, Indonesia, Australia, et cetera, to broaden that dependance.
And that I think will be the strategy of many other countries as well.
QUEST: Do you believe that this is also an opportunity not to reverse Brexit, because that was the decision of the British people, but at least
to put in place the sort of post-Brexit arrangement that should always have been there, absent dogma and prejudice on both sides.
[16:10:42]
MALMSTROM: Well, we have a trade agreement with our British friends. It is far from perfect and I think we are ready to look at it if the Brits are on
the security field. There has certainly been a lot of very close cooperation which has built trust as well.
So, I don't think the trade agreement is immediately up for revision, but that could be discussed, of course.
QUEST: I am grateful to have you, Cecilia. Thank you so much.
MALMSTROM: Thank you.
QUEST: I will give you early warning, ma'am. I think we are going to be talking a lot more over the next few weeks as this thing gets worse and
goes deeper.
MALMSTROM: I can imagine.
QUEST: So let's stay in touch. Thank you for joining us.
Now back into the U.S., voting is underway in two U.S. states in elections that will serve as an early measure of Donald Trump's popularity.
In Florida, it is two new representatives choosing replacements for the President's National Security adviser, Mike Waltz, and his one-time
attorney general pick, Matt Gaetz. Both are considered heavily Republican districts.
And in Wisconsin, Elon Musk has taken a central role in trying to flip the balance of the state's Supreme Court. The billionaire has given a million
dollar checks to voters that appeared on the campaign trail.
Harry Enten joins me now.
The Florida -- look, the Florida -- I mean, you're looking for nuance here, aren't you? Because a bit of this, a bit of that. in Wisconsin, it is who
is going to win. So what are you looking for, Harry?
HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: Yes, I think I am more interested in the Florida races, to be honest. I know it is not the win or loss --
QUEST: Have you got your microphone on, Harry? Have you got your mic on?
ENTEN: Oh, hold on.
QUEST: Come on. Get it in.
ENTEN: You know what? We are going to do -- we are going to do it live. We are going to do it live like this Richard Quest. That's what we are going
to do. Here we go.
All right, I am more interested in the Florida races than the Wisconsin races and I will tell you why. Yes, Florida -- Wisconsin is a win or lose.
But in Florida, these are federal races. They are not statewide races. And we know through history that the special elections that take place on the
congressional side can, in fact, be predictive of what happens going on in the next midterm election.
So if you take Florida 6, right, we know that Trump won that district by 30 points. If, let's say the Democrat loses by, say just 15 points, that's a
15-point improvement from how Kamala Harris did just four or five months ago and dating back since the '05-'06 cycle, whichever side outperforms in
the special elections on average actually goes on to win the U.S. House of Representatives.
So what we are looking at is the comparison point, not the win-loss, because we know it is predictive, at least through history.
QUEST: But are these particular districts so heavily MAGA that they're likely to have solidified and therefore it won't tell us much about what
might happen in the rest of the country? Are they so rare? So much into to make America great?
ENTEN: Yes, they are so into MAGA. I mean, look, here is the situation, right? Again, you look and you'll say, okay, this race in Florida 6 goes
for the Republican candidate Randy Fine by 20 points. You say, whoa, that's unbelievable. This is a district actually, that you look back 13 years ago
and Bill Nelson, the Democratic candidate for Senate, actually won it on his way to winning statewide reelection.
But again, it is the comparison. It is the comparison. That is what we are looking at. To use an example, back in 2017, the first big special election
that took place was on the U.S. House. It was in Kansas' fourth district.
Donald Trump won it by nearly 30 points, but then what you saw was that the Republican, Ron Estes did, in fact, win in that special election. I think
it was April 11th, 2017, but he only won it by six. And it was that difference. It was that spread. That's what we are looking at -- Richard.
QUEST: All right. So you're looking at this, but if we were to take a poll at the moment, what's your understanding of where the President's
popularity, whatever phrase you would use is? Has there been a shift?
ENTEN: Yes. Has there been a shift? Well, what we see is that Donald Trump's net approval rating at this point is definitely underwater. What
are we talking about? Minus four, minus five points underwater. I will point out that's better than where he was at this point in 2017.
And then I think, as part of the reason why we are interested in these races, right? Yes, there may be a Republican underperformance relative to
Donald Trump, say, in November, but will it be the same as the underperformance that we saw in 2017, where it was just this huge
underperformance because Trump became so unpopular so quickly?
[16:15:10]
That is, I think, why the interest level is where it is with these special elections, because it is the first real test of what voters actually think,
not just what the pollsters say the voters actually think.
QUEST: There is one man who is speaking at the moment, Cory Booker. He could beat you and me, hands down. He has been --
ENTEN: No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
QUEST: Twenty-one hours.
ENTEN: No, no. Let me tell you --
QUEST: Now. Now.
ENTEN: If you put -- no, if you know, if you put some Popeye's in front of me, I could go for at least 48 hours. I just would need to eat some as I
was sort of going back and forth.
QUEST: Good to see you, sir. Put the microphone away. We will need it for later. Thank you.
ENTEN: Sounds good, my friend.
QUEST: Good to see you. Now, we will carry on.
The man accused of gunning down the chief executive of UnitedHealthcare could face execution if convicted. The U.S. Justice Department apparently
will seek the death penalty for Luigi Mangione if convicted on murder charges.
In a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) QUEST: The U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi says the Justice Department will seek the death penalty for Luigi Mangione, who is facing state and federal
charges for allegedly shooting the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, Brian Thompson in Midtown Manhattan last December.
Miss Bondi says she will seek the death penalty if he is convicted of the capital charges.
Kara Scannell is with me.
This is not only -- this is a shift, isn't it, from how the Biden administration would have handled the sentencing or death penalty requests
during their time, they did not.
KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, the Biden administration put a moratorium on most death penalty cases. There were two, one involved a
terrorism charge and one was the mass shooting.
But for the most part, they put a hold on them and even right before Biden left office, he commuted the death row sentences of 37 inmates.
Trump, on the other hand, has said that this is going to be something he brings back, and this is the first high-profile case since Trump took
office about nine weeks ago, in which he is reinstating the death penalty.
They said they would seek it in this case against Mangione, and it is interesting to remember back in the first Trump administration, the prior
20 years, the federal government had not used the death penalty, not sought to use it, Trump brought it back then, and 13 people were on death row for
cases brought during Trump 1; in Trump 2, he is making it clear that this case, which is high profile, is one in which they're going to seek it.
[16:20:12]
Now, his lawyer had said at a recent court hearing that she was in talks with law enforcement about potentially mediating this and having them not
go to seek it. Clearly, that failed. And today, she issued a statement saying by seeking to murder Luigi Mangione, the Justice Department has
moved from the dysfunctional to the barbaric.
She said that this is also a result of these multiple agencies, state and federal fighting over him and saying that what hangs in the balance is the
life of this young man, 26-year-old accused of killing the UnitedHealthcare CEO.
QUEST: And they still haven't fully reconciled this business of state versus federal, have they?
SCANNELL: Yes, I mean he is facing about a dozen state charges. He has been indicted on those charges, pleaded not guilty and that case is slowly
working through the court system. He was also charged on the federal charges, and he has been charged through a criminal complaint, but he has
not yet been indicted.
Now that this decision has been made, that will begin to move its case forward, but the state charges are the ones that so far, unless things
change, are going to go first. We would expect to see a trial there, though still, no trial date has been set.
QUEST: I am grateful. Thank you very much, Kara Scannell, for watching. Thank you.
The Trump administration admits when they sent a Maryland father to El Salvador's notorious gang prison, they did so by mistake. According to U.S.
attorneys, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia is now in Salvadoran custody and cannot be returned. An immigration judge had protected Abrego Garcia from
being deported to his native country.
The White House was quite clear. They may have made a mistake, but they weren't going to change anything.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEAVITT: It was an administrative error. The administration maintains the position that this individual who was deported to El Salvador and will not
be returning to our country, was a member of the brutal and vicious MS-13 gang. That is fact number one. Fact number two, we also have credible
intelligence proving that this individual was involved in human trafficking. In fact, number three, this individual was a member, actually
a leader of the brutal MS-13 gang, which this president has designated as a foreign terrorist organization.
Fact number four is that foreign terrorists do not have legal protections in the United States of America anymore.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Now, the incident has given some of President Trump's supporters pause for thought. For instance, Joe Rogan, he condemned the administration
on his podcast over the weekend.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE ROGAN, PODCAST HOST, "THE JOE ROGAN EXPERIENCE": You've got to get scared that people who are not criminals are getting like, lassoed up and
deported and sent to like, El Salvador prisons. This is kind of crazy that that could be possible. That's horrific. And that's -- again, that's bad
for the cause.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Brian Stelter is with me.
Brian, now, first things first. Just to make clear, Garcia's lawyers say that he has nothing to do with the gang in any event, but the position of
people like Joe Rogan, which is not -- which is quite a strong one, which is, look, you've got the wrong person, whatever, you can't use the wrong
reason to do the wrong -- or the right reason to do the wrong thing. Is it going to hold any water?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: It is notable that Rogan there says this is horrific. He is very disturbed by this story.
Joe Rogan most days of the week, has the number one podcast in the United States, and he prides himself on not being a politics junkie, not being in
Washington, not being in the weeds. So it is interesting when a story breaks through to someone like Rogan, it is interesting when he does pay
attention and he is paying attention to this story about the shipment of these men to El Salvador.
Now, it is interesting there at the end, Richard, he says it is bad for our cause. It hurts the cause. Rogan is cheering for Trump. He wants Trump to
succeed. He wants immigration to be cracked down in the U.S. He wants migrants to be shipped out of the U.S. at least these kind of alleged gang
members.
But he says, if the government is not competent at doing it, if there is incompetence, then that hurts the cause. And Rogan is not the only one
saying that either.
QUEST: No, but if the argument of the White House is, look, you're dealing with procedure here. This person was a bad guy. He deserved to be deported.
Admittedly, they haven't provided any proof of it, and his attorney is saying the opposite.
STELTER: Right.
QUEST: So we don't know the truth of that fact. Will Rogan's comments carry weight back in Washington?
STELTER: Right. The issue in so many of these cases is that the White House is not providing evidence, not providing proof, neither are government
agencies.
QUEST: Right.
STELTER: They are basically just saying, trust us. And that's always been Trump's appeal. Hey, trust me, I will take care of it. But it is not
working in this case with most Americans.
The thing about Rogan, as we watch, as we listen to his podcast, Rogan is part of a vibe shift, and we are watching for other signs of this as well.
Dave Portnoy of Barstool Sports criticized the Trump White House last week over Signalgate, and we've seen some Republican senators start to very
gently criticize the administration over cuts to the health departments.
So we are looking for signs of that vibe shift, and that's why tonight's special elections in the U.S. are interesting also. Right? Are there other
signs that maybe Trump is not as invincible as members of his party have convinced themselves he is.
QUEST: All of these videos that we are seeing of green card holders being yanked off the street or being shipped over, you know, down to Louisiana or
deported. How damaging is this to brand usa? Small b small usa because there is a Brand USA.
How damaging do you think it is to how ourselves and others put these stories around the world?
STELTER: Look, I know I am dreading my next trip to Canada, right? Because Canadians are so furious with Americans. And here is the thing, Richard. I
don't think the average American knows just how angry Canadians are and that can apply in some other countries as well.
There is not necessarily an awareness in the U.S. of the damage being done by some of these policies. I think the big difference, Richard, between now
and 10 or 20 years ago is that we are watching people's stories on a personal level, on our phones, right?
I was watching a story about a neighbor, a person from two towns away who has been shipped off by ICE, and that person was here in the country
illegally. But his neighbors, his friends, are sharing videos in a very personal way, talking about the case right up in front of their faces on
their phones.
That idea of vertical video and the way people connect to those stories, that's the big difference in this moment in media.
QUEST: Newsmax, the IPO. Just look at the numbers 200 percent.
STELTER: Newsmax.
QUEST: I mean, what is driving that? It is certainly not the viewer numbers.
STELTER: I don't know what to say. Well, I know what is driving that, right? Retail investors who have been hurt and hurt and hurt for the last
two months, they want something. They want a quick buck. And so they're flipping Newsmax.
I keep waiting for the bottom to fall out of this stock, but its risen, risen, risen two days in a row. And it is -- I think, it does speak to
something real in the market. Right? There is a market for right wing media in the U.S. Fox news proved it 25 years ago. Newsmax is a part of that.
I talked to CEO, Chris Ruddy this morning. He said to me, look, people want us to succeed. They want to see us grow. But the idea that this stock was
at $10.00 in an IPO and now it is at $240.00, I don't know what to say, Richard. Overexuberance is not even -- that doesn't even begin to describe
what is happening with this.
QUEST: Oh, no. I agree. Chris would probably have a difficulty -- even he would find difficult coming up with an adjective. Good to see you, Brian.
As always, I am grateful for your time and attention tonight.
STELTER: Thanks, thanks. Thanks.
QUEST: It is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.
The White House says new tariffs, they are coming your way, and they will take effect immediately, it may not end the uncertainty over how long they
will last. It is an old rule. Tariffs on quickly, tariffs off for life.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:31:15]
QUEST: Hello, I'm Richard Quest. There's more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in just a moment.
China's military says it has launched drills around Taiwan as a stern warning. And I'm speaking with two of the candidates wanting to become the
next secretary general of U.N. Tourism. All of that after the headlines because this is CNN, and here are the news always comes first.
The E.U. says it has prepared a strong response to potential U.S. tariffs. The commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, says the bloc will protect
its interests. President Trump is expected to announce global tariffs on Wednesday. The president is calling it liberation day.
Lebanon's Health Ministry says at least four people have been killed and several injured in an Israeli strike on Beirut. It's the second such attack
in recent days. The Lebanese media says two missiles hit a building in Beirut's southern suburbs. Israel says it targeted and killed a Hezbollah
operative.
For the first time this year Kyiv says there were no long range drone strikes launched by Russia into the country overnight. Other forms of
military activity did continue, though. Ukraine's air force reports it shot down two missiles in the southern Zaporizhzhia region.
Twenty-one hours and counting. Live pictures from the U.S. Senate. The Democratic Senator Cory Booker has been on his feet speaking to the Senate
floor. He's railing against the Trump administration and its cuts to the federal government. It comes at a time when Democrats are under fire for
not taking a tougher stand against the president.
The White House has said new tariffs will take effect immediately on Wednesday. They will come into place on top of the duties that President
Trump has already announced. We've got 25 percent on steel and aluminum, and also we've got an increase of tariffs on China to 20 percent.
Elizabeth Buchwald has been watching and is our tariffs expert.
So what are you expecting tomorrow? Do we have any idea?
ELIZABETH BUCHWALD, CNN BUSINESS ECONOMICS CORRESPONDENT: Well, first off, happy liberation day eve to you. We have no idea what's going to happen
tomorrow. I don't think anyone really knows. We have suspicions. We've heard different rumors. All you could say for certain is Trump is very much
likely to announce higher tariffs. What those are I have no clue.
QUEST: Right. But the devil's in the detail, isn't it? Between the very broad 20 percent to everybody all the time on everything versus I'm going
to do you, you, you and you. And then this question of whether it's a negotiating stance or whether we're going to play this out, and see how it
goes.
BUCHWALD: So if we do see the 20 percent across the board, which has been floated more recently as a real possibility, that kind of decreases the
room for negotiation. If you're just going to cast everyone out at once. But if you see kind of individualized tariff rates going into effect or
even just being announced, that might open the window for negotiations.
QUEST: How difficult is it going to be? Or is it, from your understanding, for various for customs brokers, importers, exporters, anybody in shippers,
anybody involved in the import and export business to actually physically deal with the plumbing of tariffs?
BUCHWALD: The plumbing is a whole mess. Now what happened in February Trump got rid of the $800 de minimis exemption for packages coming from China.
[16:35:01]
And customs had for years been accepting these low value packages. And once that went into effect, they kind of were dealing with all these
bottlenecks. And they have the responsibility to charge tariffs and to assess it properly. But it's a time issue. So I'll give you an example, a
personal example. In my own life, I ordered something that was supposed to be delivered no later than February 12th, and it to this day is still
sitting at a customs port.
There was a big mix-up. I got a refund. Don't worry about me, but it creates a whole lot of mix-ups. And we also saw that recently with another
--
QUEST: So --
BUCHWALD: Yes.
QUEST: So if we -- let's just talk about the big policy question that there is some justification for these tariffs. If you are intending to change the
terms of trade and the way the trading relationship and bring production back to the U.S., but that is a very long-term strategy. That's not going
to happen a week next Thursday.
BUCHWALD: That's correct. It takes time for, if Trump, as he says he wants to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. First of all, I don't know if
that's going to happen, but I don't know furthermore that it could happen within his four years in office. And we keep having presidents changing
hands, power different in Congress, and so it creates a really difficult environment to get policies done.
QUEST: I'm grateful. You've got a very busy day tomorrow. Caffeine at the ready. We've got tariffs wherever we look. I'm grateful. Thank you for
joining us tonight.
BUCHWALD: Thank you.
QUEST: Now China's military says it's launched joint exercises around Taiwan as a stern warning. Army, Navy and rocket forces were involved in
the drills in multiple directions around the self-governing island. Taiwan has condemned the exercises, calling it troublemaker. The drills follow the
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's promise to counter China's aggression during his first visit. I mean, during his first visit to Asia.
Jim Sciutto is with me.
What's going on here, Jim?
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF U.S. SECURITY ANALYST: Listen, this is practice for an invasion, right? Whether Xi Jinping orders an invasion or some other
operation to surround and cut off the island, this is at a minimum practice to do so, preparing those forces so they're capable of obeying that order
if it's given. We don't know if the order will be given, but that is what U.S. intelligence, European intelligence, that's what Taiwanese officials
believe.
And there's another piece to this, Richard, which is notable, and that is that the increasing frequency of exercises like this is also part of the
plan, because as you have more, the presumption is or the bet is that Taiwan will react less to each successive operation.
QUEST: Right.
SCIUTTO: And therefore if China were to avoid -- were to order an invasion, then Taiwan might be less primed to react to it.
QUEST: OK.
SCIUTTO: I mean, we should take this quite seriously.
QUEST: All right. But how -- is there an element in this that, firstly, China knows that the rest of us are obsessed and watching tariffs as indeed
are China, therefore we are -- we've taken our eye off the ball to a certain extent on other things? And secondly, Hegseth has been in the
region. Obviously these war games, these war plans take -- exercises take longer than that. But it's time to test the new team.
SCIUTTO: Yes.
QUEST: It's time to test the new kid on the block.
SCIUTTO: No, I wouldn't discount that for a number of reasons. One, there's a history of China ramping up these operations when prominent U.S.
officials visit the region. You remember when Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan.
QUEST: Yes.
SCIUTTO: And you could measure it on a graph, the number of Taiwanese exercises, incursions into Taiwanese airspace by China have ticked up and
stayed up since Nancy Pelosi's visit. So there is that piece. But in terms of a test, it's -- listen, it's an open question because while Joe Biden
said repeatedly the U.S. would defend Taiwan militarily if China were to invade, Trump has not said that. In fact, Trump advisers in the past have
told me that Trump has no interest in defending the island. So it's a test.
QUEST: Right. But --
SCIUTTO: And that's another piece of this.
QUEST: This goes to this whole argument or the discussion that you and I have talked about, this spheres of influence.
SCIUTTO: Yes.
QUEST: These great leaders, men of matter. Xi, Putin, Trump.
SCIUTTO: Yes.
QUEST: You know, Trump basically saying or intimating, give me Greenland, stay out of the way, Panama Canal, do not interfere in my area of the
world, and I will not interfere in your area of the world.
SCIUTTO: And that's why, listen, folks in Ukraine are very worried that Trump does not view Ukraine as a U.S. priority, that that's in Putin's
sphere of influence. And it's why many in Taiwan are worried that Trump might, we don't know this yet, calculate that that's in China's sphere of
influence. And by the way, from Trump's perspective, in my sphere, Greenland, Panama, Canada, they're in my sphere of influence. I'll do
whatever I want there. I mean, that's the approach that some as they connect those dots are worried about.
[16:40:14]
QUEST: We have exactly Putin telegraphing back on Greenland over the weekend with Vance's visit. Putin basically saying we have no interest in
this. This is your matter.
SCIUTTO: Yes. Well, listen, if territorial acquisition by force is OK for America in Greenland, Putin might conclude it's OK for Putin in Ukraine or
China in Taiwan.
QUEST: I hear rumors that you might have the -- that you have the Canadian foreign minister on your program.
SCIUTTO: I do.
QUEST: Indeed. Well, we look forward to that. Grateful to you, sir. Thank you very much.
SCIUTTO: Thank you.
QUEST: Thank you.
The race to lead the U.N.'s tourism body is well underway. Two conversations with the two of the leading candidates challenging the
incumbent. It's next on QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: The race to become the next head of the U.N. Tourism Organization is picking up speed. The dates to watch for are May 29th and 30th. That's when
the executive council will meet and in theory propose a single candidate that's got the necessary votes that it thinks best. It's a crowded affair
for those who are looking to stand.
I spoke at the ITB travel conference to two of the leading candidates, Harry Theoharis, former tourism minister of Greece, and Gloria Guevara,
former tourism minister of Mexico and head of the WTTC. Those conversations you'll hear in just a moment.
The man they are running against is the incumbent secretary-general, Zurab Pololikashvili, who's been on this program several times. He is seeking a
controversial third term because the rules -- the spirit of the rules don't allow it.
[16:45:05]
Technically because of a loophole he is able to stand. We have made several requests to the secretary-general to join this program, to answer these
questions, and to put forward his own manifesto. He has now agreed to an interview. We weren't able to do it at ITB, and we're sorting out the
logistics.
So to the two major candidates who are standing against him, firstly, Gloria Guevara, Mexico's former tourism secretary and the former head of
the World Travel and Tourism Council, the WTTC. She told me that she is focusing on collaboration.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GLORIA GUEVARA, CANDIDATE FOR UNWTO SECRETARY-GENERAL: I believe we have the opportunity to take travel and tourism to the next level. And help
millions of people around the world.
QUEST: Right. But what policies would you like to see change? What would you like to do?
GUEVARA: A lot of things. So we need to empower communities. We need to have an agenda for resilience. We need to have an agenda for
sustainability. We need to invest more in innovation, for instance, in tools. We need to share best practices. I see and I talk to a lot of
ministers all the time, and sometimes we don't look at the past, we don't share from our experience.
And this is something that I saw also in WTTC. I believe there's an opportunity to provide more tools to the member states so that they don't
make the same mistakes and they learn from others' successes and mistakes. So I would love to see more research, more training, more education. Having
the U.N. Tourism being that platform for everyone.
QUEST: The incumbent, the current secretary-general, is standing for a third term. I guess it's a question of whether the spirit versus the
technicalities. Technically, yes, you can do it. The spirit says you can't in a sense, but he's running for a third term. What do you say?
GUEVARA: You cannot change the rules in the middle and benefit from the rules. I believe in transparency. I believe in good governance, and I
believe also in rotation and in opportunities and multilateralism. So I don't believe that it's right to change the rules and force a third term.
That's not good for the world, especially the challenges that we face right now.
I think there's an opportunity for a new change. I hear that from all the ministers that I have been talking. They want change. They want a fresh
start. They want to work in a new era.
QUEST: So if we look at who's supporting you, I know you've got some of the big private sector companies, but which countries besides your own?
GUEVARA: A lot of countries. As you know, the vote is secret. I have been talking to countries in Latin America, in Africa, in Europe. I have a lot
of support for many reasons because they know me. They know that I can build bridges with the private sector. As you say, over 100 CEOs from
around the world are supporting me. Unprecedented. That has never happened. They have seen how I build bridges with the private sector. So I have
countries from all over the world supporting me right now. And the idea is I'm going to be campaigning the next 12 weeks to get more votes.
QUEST: I'm not telling you anything you didn't know. And I asked Minister Harry the same question. Is there a danger that the two of you, Harry and
yourself, you split the vote and the incumbent wins? Or at some point, is one or other of you going to have to say you take it, you know, we'll
combine forces?
GUEVARA: That's a great point. We need to look what is the best for this sector. Right? And as I said before, we need change. We cannot have exactly
the same person three terms. That's the first step. Second step, the countries, the executive council and the 160 countries at the right time
first the 35 or the executive council, they need to choose the best person. And at some point, yes, we need to compromise.
QUEST: So at some point that choice will have to be made.
GUEVARA: Yes. Actually, I reach out to him three times already to try to figure out how do we work together. Now we have different paths, but we
need to look for the best for the sector always.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
QUEST: That is Gloria Guevara. In a moment, we'll hear from the other leading candidate, the former Greek tourism minister Harry Theoharis. We'll
talk to him when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:51:50]
QUEST: Returning to the race for the secretary of U.N. Tourism. We've already heard from the former Mexican tourism minister, Gloria Guevara. Now
it's the turn of the former Greek tourism minister, another of the leading candidates. It's Harry Theoharis. He says sustainability is the key to the
future of U.N. Tourism.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARRY THEOHARIS, FORMER GREEK TOURISM MINISTER: This organization is currently not doing enough for the task that we have at hand. The
transformation of tourism towards more sustainability and towards ensuring that we deal with resilience and those issues that are very, very important
in this day and age cannot be served with an organization that operates like that. So we need to reform it in order to transform tourism.
QUEST: What reforms would you make?
THEOHARIS: Well, many. We need to basically turn this organization upside down, return it to the member states and not to the bureaucracy. We live in
a day and age where countries are actually withdrawing from multilateral organizations. We've seen the U.S. position in many such cases. We have to
ensure that we create value. We are transparent. We respond back to our member states with efficiency in order for them to trust us, to help them
in their touristic enterprise.
QUEST: Right. I know you say this is about principles, not personalities.
THEOHARIS: Of course.
QUEST: But the reality is that if it weren't, you know, you are standing against the incumbent, therefore you don't feel he's worthy of a third
term.
THEOHARIS: Yes, well, this is a matter of principle because no U.N. organization has the ability for a third term. The rules for this
organization precluded the third term, and they've been slightly manipulated, I would say, or changed in order to allow the third term. For
us, it's a democratic principle. No U.N. organization should have a third term. And this is why we're running.
QUEST: The reality is, nobody will say it publicly, let me say it for you. The U.N. Tourism does not punch anywhere near the weight that it should. No
one really listens to what it says. Nobody really cares about what it's doing.
THEOHARIS: I'll give you an example, agreeing with what you just said. In Baku, the numbers that came out for tourism were that it has adjusted its
emissions by 1 percent. This is too low, both in terms to the task at hand that we have, in terms of the adjustment we have to make, and compared to
the other industries. So we are falling behind. We need to take again the SDGs and push them on the ground in the tourism community.
QUEST: Who's supporting you?
THEOHARIS: Well, I am fortunate to have the support of many countries, but this is not just the support that I'm asking for. I'm asking them to become
partners in the day after the election.
QUEST: If there's one policy that you would point to, what would it be?
THEOHARIS: Well, I'll give you the two proposals that I made recently in Jamaica in the Resilience Conference of Ed Bartlett. Number one, we need a
resilience tourism fund to help the most unfortunate states after the calamities that we have befallen so often. And number two, we need to
create a new data center for resilience that can assess the risks and can help in mitigating those risks.
[16:55:06]
QUEST: The big unknown that people will talk about is that you and the other principal contender, Gloria Guevara, are likely to split the anti-
incumbent vote, thereby allowing the incumbent to win through the middle. How are you going to prevent that? At some point, one or other of you is
going to have to decide to let the other run.
THEOHARIS: Well, I mean, I think that's a possibility. I'm not saying that this cannot happen. Certainly we need to work. Everyone that believes in
the reform of this organization needs to do so in practice. For the time being, it hasn't been possible to join forces. But this is cannot be
precluded in the future.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
QUEST: That is the former Greek tourism minister. And a reminder that we are still hoping to speak to the incumbent, to the secretary-general. and
that will happen before hopefully the election at the end of May.
"Profitable Moment," next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: Tonight's "Profitable Moment." So we are on the eve of tariffs which one way or the other is going to shift the global trading environment like
we've never seen before. It will be very easy for the hyperbole, the exaggeration, all the sort of talk of what's likely to happen. We simply
don't know the range and extent and even what we get tomorrow it's only a starting point, really, for negotiation to how this will play out over the
longer term. And tariffs per se, of course, are a multi-year policy.
The only thing I do know about tariffs is that nobody comes to the table with clean hands. The countries who say, oh, we are -- we're better than
anybody else. Well, there's usually some hidden tariffs somewhere that they put on somebody else. So everybody is a baddie in one shape or another. But
usually these things are sorted out either just very small tariffs or sectoral. Never have we seen anything like this. And in fact it goes
contrary to everything I ever learned as a financial journalist and since.
So tariffs will be arriving in some shape or form tomorrow. What the economic effect will be we don't know. I strongly suggest you hold on to
your hat. And if you haven't got one, it'll cost you more because there's probably a tariff on it.
And that's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS for tonight. I'm Richard Quest in New York. Whatever you're up to in the hours ahead, tariffs away. I'll see you
tomorrow.
END
