Topic: US proposes tariffs on 1,300 Chinese goods (Read 206 times)
China has unfair trade practices with regard to American technology. The trade representation made the list of the Chinese goods on which 25% duty will be imposed. At the same time, China has also published a list of us goods that will be subject to a duty if the US imposes restrictions on Chinese goods.I think that these duties will not cause significant harm to the economy. This is just a retaliatory strike against unscrupulous Chinese traders. This may result in higher prices for some goods. This will affect ordinary consumers.
Mr Trump wants to cut the trade deficit with China. He has repeatedly accused China of using unfair trade practices after his election. During the campaign, Mr. Trump also focused on the issue. That, he says, has hit manufacturing in the United States. Mr Trump may also be trying to attract the support of voters in the manufacturing sector.
Last year, the U.S. trade deficit with China was about $375 billion. That makes Mr Trump unhappy.
But while Mr Trump may be disgusted, the trade deficit is not necessarily a bad thing. Over the past few decades, many rich countries have experienced the transition from an industrial economy to a service economy. In 2017, U.S. service exports totaled $242.7 billion, including banking, finance and tourism. Services account for 90 per cent of the us economy. By contrast, China's service sector exports are far less than manufacturing exports.
So Mr Trump's obsession with cutting the trade deficit is not always welcome. Critics say the trump administration is moving toward protectionism.
Last year, the U.S. trade deficit with China was about $375 billion. That makes Mr Trump unhappy.
But while Mr Trump may be disgusted, the trade deficit is not necessarily a bad thing. Over the past few decades, many rich countries have experienced the transition from an industrial economy to a service economy. In 2017, U.S. service exports totaled $242.7 billion, including banking, finance and tourism. Services account for 90 per cent of the us economy. By contrast, China's service sector exports are far less than manufacturing exports.
So Mr Trump's obsession with cutting the trade deficit is not always welcome. Critics say the trump administration is moving toward protectionism.
Mr Trump's behaviour is quite "unilateralist".
Now that China is the world's factory, what about Mr Trump after China? Will he do anything for other countries with surpluses?
Now that China is the world's factory, what about Mr Trump after China? Will he do anything for other countries with surpluses?
I believe that unilateral decisions about world trade is the worst decision a country can take these days. There is the WTO, there are possibilities for agreements, there are trade blocs. Trump has an attitude of who owns a business, not the attitude of a president.
it seems that this is business competition and possible from a political problem, but indeed with this decision will harm both countries and give effect indirectly to all countries in the world. but it is very possible if the two countries are working together it will use cryptocurrency as a means of payment
I don't think it's about who needs who more
China always wants maximun their benefit from export but US wants winning in "trade war"
After all they will need each other, US capital wants to usualize china manufacture, CN wants their market
China always wants maximun their benefit from export but US wants winning in "trade war"
After all they will need each other, US capital wants to usualize china manufacture, CN wants their market
No way! Stop joking! The current trade war, a lot of impacts on the decline in the cost of imports and exports, especially in the rapid decline of gold, a lot of selfishness that is happening now only raises prestige, it should not happen there should be an immediate solution where there will be news worse in the future.
If it was by all means on products within this two great power country then I may not affected to it.. Is this trade war a sign of a bigger problem then this is no good indication for a much longer conflicts.. We do know that USA has a debt on China and that is an open secret,, but it also doesn’t mean it is the reason behind it..
I may in favor of US in this battle against China,, but I’m against any conflict that may result in a something every person doesn’t want,, A War.. I’m paranoid and I’m guilty with it..
I may in favor of US in this battle against China,, but I’m against any conflict that may result in a something every person doesn’t want,, A War.. I’m paranoid and I’m guilty with it..
I disagree. China has an advantage here, especially in the long run. It's not good for China too, but don't get fooled. They have more mechanisms to make US life worse. Do you remember a story where they could change their reserve from dollar to another fiat currency? They would lose a lot, but the US would be hit hard. China with a strong economy and low salaries is in the safer position than the US. And their market is everywhere. Trump will pay those iPhones much higher if he doesn't stay down with economy war with China.
Bangladesh and India to the rescue !!! And next the whole Africa.
Chinese workers are for quite a few years not that cheap anymore.
Apple can move its assembly lines in another country with ease they don't need specialized workers. Same for most imports also. But when trying to find other suppliers for American goods the Chinese will find there is none.
Remember how Russia banned food from the EU but they didn't say a word about medical equipment and medicine?
That's because they knew they imported 90% of it and there was no other seller.
We have a saying here about two people fighting and the third winning.
Let's see if the EU plays its cards well on this.
People are labeling this a "trade war". If the united states is serious about this, I don't think there will be a war. There will be a struggle, china will put up some resistance but over the long term the united states will win and china will be forced to concede and give in to demands. There could be some short term negatives but over the long term the end result could be positive for americans and the united states. Like some have said china needs the USA more than the USA needs china. This gives america leverage in the relationship and enables it to dictate terms.
How do people see this panning out?
China has an economic strategy of enforcing high import taxes and forbidding some of the foreign products. That was the economic strategy of most of socialistic republics that emerged after WW2. However, China obviously found a much better formula since it obviously works, considering the rise of their GDP. You have copies of iPhone, Google, Facebook, largest world producers having their factories there (not just because of the cheap labor, but because if you produce a certain percentage of a final product in China - you are free of import fees) etc.
That is a strategy. Other countries have the right to agree with that or not and to trade with China or not.
Regarding the new USA policy I just hope it is not just an example of Trump's immature and bad propaganda, but an actual well-thought and analyzed move. It is in USA right to impose import quotas. Whether this move will shake China strategy I leave to experts and those that know the situation and actual figures much better. I also leave to others to evaluate whether this is an economic or political move... whether USA is fighting to preserve the 1st place, Trump fighting to prove a point, or USA and world can actually benefit from this.
As one of the characters from one of my favorite books likes to say: "Let's see what happens".
Trump is trying to balance out China's surplus but that is a no go as it will hurt both economies.
Only who can profit from this is Trump and his partners.
Only who can profit from this is Trump and his partners.
I believe that unilateral decisions about world trade is the worst decision a country can take these days. There is the WTO, there are possibilities for agreements, there are trade blocs. Trump has an attitude of who owns a business, not the attitude of a president.
People are labeling this a "trade war". If the united states is serious about this, I don't think there will be a war. There will be a struggle, china will put up some resistance but over the long term the united states will win and china will be forced to concede and give in to demands. There could be some short term negatives but over the long term the end result could be positive for americans and the united states. Like some have said china needs the USA more than the USA needs china. This gives america leverage in the relationship and enables it to dictate terms.
How do people see this panning out?
How do people see this panning out?
Nobody wins in a trade war. Everybody loses.
Makes sense, I'm happy this administration does this. Thank the lord someone cares enough to protect america.
You have it backwards. Trump has hurt America in order to enrich his corporate allies. A few corporations will benefit at the expense of everyone, including their employees.
Who do you think will get the most benefit for this "trade war"?
I think countries who are not involved, so I say. Go ahead with it,the world doesn't are not too dependent on this two giants.
I think countries who are not involved, so I say. Go ahead with it,the world doesn't are not too dependent on this two giants.
This had to happen at some point, as China has been putting tariffs on US products for far too long. They've been doing it and we've been leaving them alone without placing the same sort of tarrifs. We must be equal in what we do.
Makes sense, I'm happy this administration does this. Thank the lord someone cares enough to protect america.
Makes sense, I'm happy this administration does this. Thank the lord someone cares enough to protect america.
As a non US resident I can notice one simple thing. Since Donalt Trump was elected the left mainstream liberals tried to blame him for everything they could by introducing his actions as an apocalypse. No one ever noticed that there was already a hundred of custom duties between USA and China (and the rest of the world) before Trump was elected. The sad truth is that the free America was always pretty closed from non us residents. This time nothing changed that seriously, especially if we count that China was always a protectionistic country and banned many things previously in order to support their busineses.
this trade war is inevitably hurting worldwide economics too
stock exchange indexes in asian are dropping as a result of this business quarrel
gold price is rising as people withdraw their money off the markets and place it in gold safe haven
I just hope all this solved quickly so stock markets and businesses can return back to normal and pick up its paces
If this will be going on for 6 months and more, we're going to see additional greater impacts on global economics
stock exchange indexes in asian are dropping as a result of this business quarrel
gold price is rising as people withdraw their money off the markets and place it in gold safe haven
I just hope all this solved quickly so stock markets and businesses can return back to normal and pick up its paces
If this will be going on for 6 months and more, we're going to see additional greater impacts on global economics
I disagree. China has an advantage here, especially in the long run. It's not good for China too, but don't get fooled. They have more mechanisms to make US life worse. Do you remember a story where they could change their reserve from dollar to another fiat currency? They would lose a lot, but the US would be hit hard. China with a strong economy and low salaries is in the safer position than the US. And their market is everywhere. Trump will pay those iPhones much higher if he doesn't stay down with economy war with China.
US products sold in China is very less compared the China's products sold in the USA that means China will lose more money in this trade war. At the same time, USA companies also less profited because now they are forced to set up a company in their expensive country to manufacture products to sell at home. Those companies still keep the China factories because China manufactured products still can sell to other countries like in Europe and in Asia but their volume may reduce to some extent still china will get the manufacturing business.
Quote
The Trump administration Tuesday unveiled a list of roughly $50 billion in Chinese electronics, aerospace and machinery products it plans to hit with steep tariffs, the latest move in a deepening U.S.-China trade conflict.
The new 25 percent import taxes are designed to penalize China for discriminatory policies that the United States says puts its companies at a disadvantage in the Chinese market. President Trump has complained that the Chinese government forces U.S. companies to surrender their proprietary technology in return for access to local customers and steals other trade secrets via cyber theft.
Trump’s latest protectionist move threatens to upend global supply chains for corporations such as Apple and Dell, raise prices for American consumers who have grown accustomed to inexpensive electronics and aggravate tensions between the world’s two largest economies.
“The pain will be very visible and the potential gains will be very abstract. The administration hasn’t prepared the U.S. for the downsides of a trade war,” said Brad Setser, a former White House economist in the Obama administration.
With just seven months before congressional elections, that could pose a political challenge for the president, who promised his supporters he would overhaul U.S. trade policy to benefit American workers.
Voters disapproved of Trump’s handling of trade policy by 54 percent to 34 percent in the latest Quinnipiac University poll, with only Republicans and white voters without a college education backing his tariff offensive.
In acting, the president swept aside opposition from business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, which agree that China’s mercantilist policies must be confronted, but fear the consequences of a tit-for-tat trade conflict.
“If history is any indication, these proposed tariffs will not work and will be entirely counterproductive. Tariffs penalize U.S. consumers by increasing prices on technology products and will not change China’s behavior,” said Dean Garfield, chief executive of the Information Technology Industry Council, which represents companies such as Apple, Dell, IBM and Google. “Instead, the administration should act consistent with international obligations and work with other countries to address systemic issues with China.”
The office of the U.S. trade representative released a list of 1,300 proposed tariff increases, but set a 30-day period for receiving comments from affected businesses. That pause leaves an opening for the sort of negotiated settlement that business groups favor.
In compiling the list, U.S. officials used algorithms to identify products that benefited from China’s state-directed campaign of technology acquisition while eliminating those whose inclusion would disrupt the U.S. economy.
The list was drafted to achieve “the lowest consumer impact,” according to Robert E. Lighthizer, the U.S. trade representative. So items such as clothing and toys were excluded.
But Rick Helfenbein, chief executive of the American Apparel and Footwear Association, said that machinery used to make footwear or clothing will be hit with tariffs. “This would directly raise costs on domestic manufacturers and impact our ability to grow Made in USA,” he said in a statement.
Parts for trash compactors, molds for the manufacture of semiconductors, motors, generators, cassette players, smart cards and high-definition color video projectors dotted the list along with unlikely items like rocket launchers and torpedoes.
The administration’s estimate of $50 billion of affected Chinese imports is designed to balance the harm to the U.S. economy from China’s rapacious technology practices and “to obtain elimination of China’s harmful acts, policies and practices,” Lighthizer wrote in a statement accompanying the tariff list.
Douglas Irwin, author of “Clashing Over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy,” said Trump’s action is one of the largest trade moves in more than three decades. In previous episodes, the U.S. has wielded tariffs as a tool to compel Japan or the European Union to negotiate trade conflicts, he said.
But both the E.U. and Japan were U.S. allies who shared a market orientation while China is a strategic adversary commanding a state-led economy.
“It’s an enormous retaliation relative to what we were doing with Japan in the 1980s,” said Irwin, an economics professor at Dartmouth College. “ ... The chances of it not working out well is much higher in this case than it was with the E.U. and Japan.”
China has opposed President Trump’s tariff plan, calling it “self-defeating” and vowing to fight a trade war if the U.S. persists.
Beijing earlier this week imposed tariffs on about $3 billion in American goods, in response to separate U.S. import levies on steel and aluminum.
That has kept the commercial conflict between the two economic giants contained. But if China responds to this latest tariff action on a dollar-for-dollar basis, it could damage more than one-third of total U.S. exports to China and Hong Kong, said Setser, a senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations.
The U.S. shipped more than $130 billion in goods to China last year, plus an additional $40 billion to Hong Kong, much of which flows through the port city to the mainland.
Chinese action of that magnitude would impose substantial costs on both China’s economy and that of the U.S.
U.S. farm groups are especially worried about being caught in the crossfire. China’s response to Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs landed hardest on the agricultural sector, including products such fruit, wine and pork.
Future Chinese action is likely to hit the farm belt even harder. The U.S. exported $12.4 billion worth of soybeans to China last year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, down almost 13 percent from the year earlier, as Chinese buyers began turning to alternative suppliers like Brazil.
In Evansville, Indiana, Joe Steinkamp, 52, raises soybeans and white corn on a 40-acre plot his family has farmed for 100 years. He exports about one-third of his soybean crop to China, so if the Chinese shun American suppliers, he risks losing around $170,000 in annual income.
“We’re all about trade with China. We spent the last 25 years building that trade relationship,” said Steinkamp. “I appreciate the president looking out for our entire country. We just don’t want soybeans to be the fall guy and take all the punches from the Chinese.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/04/03/trump-administration-targets-chinese-electronics-aerospace-and-machinery-goods-with-50-billion-in-tariffs/?utm_term=.026470dad731
The new 25 percent import taxes are designed to penalize China for discriminatory policies that the United States says puts its companies at a disadvantage in the Chinese market. President Trump has complained that the Chinese government forces U.S. companies to surrender their proprietary technology in return for access to local customers and steals other trade secrets via cyber theft.
Trump’s latest protectionist move threatens to upend global supply chains for corporations such as Apple and Dell, raise prices for American consumers who have grown accustomed to inexpensive electronics and aggravate tensions between the world’s two largest economies.
“The pain will be very visible and the potential gains will be very abstract. The administration hasn’t prepared the U.S. for the downsides of a trade war,” said Brad Setser, a former White House economist in the Obama administration.
With just seven months before congressional elections, that could pose a political challenge for the president, who promised his supporters he would overhaul U.S. trade policy to benefit American workers.
Voters disapproved of Trump’s handling of trade policy by 54 percent to 34 percent in the latest Quinnipiac University poll, with only Republicans and white voters without a college education backing his tariff offensive.
In acting, the president swept aside opposition from business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, which agree that China’s mercantilist policies must be confronted, but fear the consequences of a tit-for-tat trade conflict.
“If history is any indication, these proposed tariffs will not work and will be entirely counterproductive. Tariffs penalize U.S. consumers by increasing prices on technology products and will not change China’s behavior,” said Dean Garfield, chief executive of the Information Technology Industry Council, which represents companies such as Apple, Dell, IBM and Google. “Instead, the administration should act consistent with international obligations and work with other countries to address systemic issues with China.”
The office of the U.S. trade representative released a list of 1,300 proposed tariff increases, but set a 30-day period for receiving comments from affected businesses. That pause leaves an opening for the sort of negotiated settlement that business groups favor.
In compiling the list, U.S. officials used algorithms to identify products that benefited from China’s state-directed campaign of technology acquisition while eliminating those whose inclusion would disrupt the U.S. economy.
The list was drafted to achieve “the lowest consumer impact,” according to Robert E. Lighthizer, the U.S. trade representative. So items such as clothing and toys were excluded.
But Rick Helfenbein, chief executive of the American Apparel and Footwear Association, said that machinery used to make footwear or clothing will be hit with tariffs. “This would directly raise costs on domestic manufacturers and impact our ability to grow Made in USA,” he said in a statement.
Parts for trash compactors, molds for the manufacture of semiconductors, motors, generators, cassette players, smart cards and high-definition color video projectors dotted the list along with unlikely items like rocket launchers and torpedoes.
The administration’s estimate of $50 billion of affected Chinese imports is designed to balance the harm to the U.S. economy from China’s rapacious technology practices and “to obtain elimination of China’s harmful acts, policies and practices,” Lighthizer wrote in a statement accompanying the tariff list.
Douglas Irwin, author of “Clashing Over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy,” said Trump’s action is one of the largest trade moves in more than three decades. In previous episodes, the U.S. has wielded tariffs as a tool to compel Japan or the European Union to negotiate trade conflicts, he said.
But both the E.U. and Japan were U.S. allies who shared a market orientation while China is a strategic adversary commanding a state-led economy.
“It’s an enormous retaliation relative to what we were doing with Japan in the 1980s,” said Irwin, an economics professor at Dartmouth College. “ ... The chances of it not working out well is much higher in this case than it was with the E.U. and Japan.”
China has opposed President Trump’s tariff plan, calling it “self-defeating” and vowing to fight a trade war if the U.S. persists.
Beijing earlier this week imposed tariffs on about $3 billion in American goods, in response to separate U.S. import levies on steel and aluminum.
That has kept the commercial conflict between the two economic giants contained. But if China responds to this latest tariff action on a dollar-for-dollar basis, it could damage more than one-third of total U.S. exports to China and Hong Kong, said Setser, a senior fellow for international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations.
The U.S. shipped more than $130 billion in goods to China last year, plus an additional $40 billion to Hong Kong, much of which flows through the port city to the mainland.
Chinese action of that magnitude would impose substantial costs on both China’s economy and that of the U.S.
U.S. farm groups are especially worried about being caught in the crossfire. China’s response to Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs landed hardest on the agricultural sector, including products such fruit, wine and pork.
Future Chinese action is likely to hit the farm belt even harder. The U.S. exported $12.4 billion worth of soybeans to China last year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, down almost 13 percent from the year earlier, as Chinese buyers began turning to alternative suppliers like Brazil.
In Evansville, Indiana, Joe Steinkamp, 52, raises soybeans and white corn on a 40-acre plot his family has farmed for 100 years. He exports about one-third of his soybean crop to China, so if the Chinese shun American suppliers, he risks losing around $170,000 in annual income.
“We’re all about trade with China. We spent the last 25 years building that trade relationship,” said Steinkamp. “I appreciate the president looking out for our entire country. We just don’t want soybeans to be the fall guy and take all the punches from the Chinese.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/04/03/trump-administration-targets-chinese-electronics-aerospace-and-machinery-goods-with-50-billion-in-tariffs/?utm_term=.026470dad731
A few days ago there was a news article published entitled: "China slaps tariffs on 123 US products".
Today we have the US response: "US proposes tariffs on 1,300 chinese goods".
People are labeling this a "trade war". If the united states is serious about this, I don't think there will be a war. There will be a struggle, china will put up some resistance but over the long term the united states will win and china will be forced to concede and give in to demands. There could be some short term negatives but over the long term the end result could be positive for americans and the united states. Like some have said china needs the USA more than the USA needs china. This gives america leverage in the relationship and enables it to dictate terms.
How do people see this panning out?
Jump to: