The order, issued on Friday, does not specify the rate that could be imposed, but uses 25% as an example. It says the tariff could apply to goods imported into the US from any nation that “directly or indirectly purchases, imports, or otherwise acquires any goods or services from Iran”.

A rising number of end-of-life patients in hospitals could affect the level of treatment carried out this winter, a group of regional NHS leaders have been told.

A consultant in palliative care highlighted the impending “crisis” during an online internal meeting of health leaders in Sussex, a recording of which has been heard by the BBC.

The consultant at University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust described dilemmas facing hospital managers when some patients are having to be given end-of-life care in A&E corridors.

The bleak assessment is likely to be echoed in other NHS regions as building winter pressures increase the challenge of trying to find hospital beds for sick patients needing care.

University Hospitals Sussex Trust includes Worthing Hospital, Royal Sussex County Hospital, St Richard’s Hospital in Chichester and Princess Royal Hospital in Haywards Heath.

Doctors and officials from East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust, which includes Conquest Hospital in Hastings and Eastbourne District General Hospital, also took part in the meeting along with community health representatives.

The consultant made a slide presentation entitled “Palliative and End of Life Care in Sussex” at the meeting, which took place on 4 November.

She told the audience that local hospices were struggling and it was difficult to find places for patients who need end-of-life care, while it was sometimes not clear how much support there might be in the local community when people are sent home.

She said: “I am really worried that patients who have treatable conditions are not going to be able to get into hospital and be treated because there are so many end-of-life patients in hospital beds.”

She went on to say “we are no longer putting patients on the waiting list for transfer who are just straightforward dying”, focusing only on those with complex needs.

On giving enhanced palliative care in A&E, the consultant said it was a “really difficult choice – do you admit them for corridor care or do you turn them round, put them in the back of the ambulance where they may die on the way home”.

She argued there were “lots of patients in hospital who don’t need to be there, lots of patients with complex needs who don’t have their needs met”.

She concluded: “We’ve all known this crisis is coming – it is getting worse and worse”.

A spokesperson for the NHS in Sussex said it was committed to ensuring that patients have access to the “best possible, high-quality palliative and end-of-life care”.

They said: “This includes providing a range of places for compassionate, person-centred care – and importantly, where possible, in settings out of hospital, such as community settings, and our hospices.

“Emergency care services across Sussex remain under significant pressure but staff continue to work incredibly hard to make sure patients can receive the care they need at our hospitals, and across all our health and care services.

“There is robust partnership work in place over the winter period to support individual care plans, and to ensure that people are in the right NHS service for their needs.”

But the Royal College of Emergency Medicine said delayed discharges were a huge challenge across the NHS, and a lack of social or community care could mean some patients needing end-of-life care and support could not leave hospitals.

Its president, Dr Ian Higginson, said the college was “worried about the number of patients who need end-of-life care who end up in emergency departments, and then hospitals, because the dedicated services they need are not available”.

He said: “Patients who would prefer to be at home may end up in our corridors, which are not the right places for anyone, let alone those who are at the end of their lives.”

One NHS clinician, who wished to remain anonymous, contacted the BBC, saying problems had built up for some time: “End-of-life care delivered in emergency departments, corridors, ambulances, or via unsupported discharges home has become increasingly routine across multiple regions. What is particularly striking is the recurring pattern: hospital beds occupied by dying patients who should never be there and limited or delayed access to hospice or community care.”

The NHS Confederation, which represents NHS leaders, said hospitals can be the “default option” when community and social care provision is under pressure or unavailable.

“The solution is not about asking hospitals alone to absorb more pressure – it is about investing across the whole system,” said Rory Deighton, director of the Confederation’s acute network.

Meanwhile, community services are also stretched and hospices are warning of a funding crisis.

Toby Porter, chief executive of Hospice UK said: “While hospital can be the right place for some, a busy ward just isn’t the right place for most people who die.

“Hospices across the country want to provide more care in the community but this year we’ve seen it cut back because of funding pressures. And that is having a knock-on effect in hospitals.”

US President Donald Trump’s unpredictable tariff crusade—framed domestically as a strategy to revive American jobs—appears to be delivering the opposite effect for one of the country’s biggest defense manufacturers. Lockheed Martin, builder of the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter, is now facing an exodus of customers, cancelled contracts, and an uncertain future for more than USD 100 billion in potential sales.

The irony is striking: while Trump champions American military might and “Make America Great Again” industrial nationalism, the F-35 program—the most expensive weapons system in history, costing an estimated USD 2 trillion over its lifetime—has become a prime casualty of his foreign and economic policies.

Even before Trump returned to the White House in January, Lockheed Martin was grappling with ballooning maintenance bills, delays in the critical TR-3 upgrade, engine modernization setbacks, and rising production costs. But in 2025, the biggest threat to the F-35 has not come from technical issues. It has come from Washington.

Trump’s escalating tariff wars, his public threats against allies, and his erratic stance on NATO have pushed multiple countries to either cancel or reconsider previously signed F-35 contracts—some of them years in the making.

Despite the jet’s combat performance during Israel’s 12-day war with Iran in June—where F-35Is conducted deep strikes, SEAD/DEAD missions, and escorted B-2 stealth bombers—the geopolitical fallout from Trump’s policies has overshadowed these battlefield successes.

As a result, three countries have cancelled orders in 2025, one has suspended a major contract for review, and one has rejected the jet outright. Combined, Lockheed Martin has already lost 150 confirmed F-35 sales this year and faces uncertainty over an additional 72 jets.

The first blow came in March when Portugal scrapped its plan to buy up to 36 F-35As. Lisbon’s air force had recommended the aircraft, but outgoing Defence Minister Nuno Melo pointed directly to the United States’ reliability as an ally.

“The world has changed,” Melo warned, noting that US political unpredictability, restrictions on aircraft usage, and changing NATO dynamics made European alternatives more appealing. Portugal is now considering Rafale, Eurofighter, or Gripen fighters.

Politico described the move as “one of the first examples of the U.S. president undermining a potential lucrative arms deal.”

In July, a 39% US tariff on Swiss watches, coffee capsules, and other goods triggered political uproar in Switzerland, where lawmakers questioned the wisdom of proceeding with a USD 6 billion deal for 36 F-35A jets—signed back in 2022.

Green Party leader Balthasar Glättli blasted the contradiction: “A country which throws rocks at us in trade shouldn’t get a present.”

Though the contract remains intact as of November, Bern is now renegotiating pricing, and internal pressure remains intense.

In August, Spain cancelled its 2023 €6.25 billion allocation for up to 65 F-35s. While Madrid had initially eyed the A and B variants to replace its Hornet and Harrier fleets, Trump’s demand that all NATO countries spend 5% of GDP on defense ignited a public spat.

Spain currently targets 2% spending and bristled at Washington’s pressure campaign. Madrid says it will now pursue Eurofighter upgrades or the future FCAS sixth-generation system.

Trump offered F-35s to India earlier this year, shortly after India’s four-day conflict with Pakistan. But the proposal was dead on arrival.

With Trump imposing a stunning 50% tariff on Indian exports and repeatedly provoking New Delhi, the Modi government dismissed the F-35 option despite China reportedly equipping Pakistan with its new J-35A stealth fighters.

New Delhi is now focusing on Russia’s Su-57 as its only viable fifth-generation contender.

Perhaps the biggest potential setback is unfolding in Canada, where a 2023 deal to acquire 88 F-35s is under formal review. Ottawa is reassessing whether the aircraft still aligns with Canada’s defense and sovereignty needs “in light of evolving geopolitics.”

Sensing a once-in-a-generation opening, Sweden has launched a full-scale charm offensive to sell Saab Gripens, promising to turn Canada into a production hub and create 10,000 domestic jobs.

Industry Minister Mélanie Joly openly questioned whether the F-35 deal has delivered sufficient economic benefits, calling Saab’s offer “very interesting.” If Canada cancels the remaining 72 jets, it would represent the single largest loss ever for the F-35 program.

The only bright spot for Lockheed in 2025 is Saudi Arabia’s revived interest in acquiring the F-35. Riyadh has sought the jet for years, and Trump has now signaled approval. But the deal still requires congressional backing—and faces fierce Israeli opposition, human rights criticism, and skepticism even within allied militaries.

When Trump returned tariffs against allies—from India to Switzerland, Canada to the EU—few anticipated the collateral damage to America’s premier fighter program. But the global backlash has been swift.

Between cancellations, renegotiations, and open reconsiderations, more than USD 100 billion worth of F-35 contracts are now at risk.