What's new

China Once Looked Tough on Trade. Now Its Options Are Dwindling.

F-22Raptor

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
16,980
Reaction score
3
Country
United States
Location
United States
BEIJING — President Trump imposed tariffs in July on $34 billion in Chinese goods. China matched them dollar for dollar with its own.

Then he hit an additional $16 billion in goods in August. China matched that, too.

Now, Mr. Trump has made his biggest move yet, announcing 10 percent tariffs starting in a week on $200 billion a year of Chinese goods. But this time, China can’t match them all — and that crystallizes a growing problem for Beijing.

On Tuesday, Chinese officials responded to the president’s latest move by following through on an earlier threat to impose tariffs on $60 billion in American goods — nearly everything China buys from the United States.

China’s responses have so far failed to thwart Mr. Trump’s trade offensive, and with the White House amping up the fight again, Chinese leaders aren’t sure how to respond, people briefed on economic policymaking discussions say.


Chinese officials “are generally confused,” said Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda, a trade specialist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who has been traveling around China speaking with officials, businesspeople and workers.

“They don’t know what to do,” he added. “They worry that the tit-for-tat model is playing into Trump’s hands.”

China does not import nearly enough from the United States to target $200 billion in American goods — let alone the additional $267 billion in Chinese goods that Mr. Trump has threatened to tax.

But China’s leaders feel they cannot back down. They have presented the trade war as part of a broader effort by the United States to contain China’s rise.


Mr. Trump has said as much, and did so again at a news conference on Tuesday. “China has been taking advantage of the United States for a long time, and that’s not happening anymore,” he said.

The Chinese public could see any effort to soothe tensions as capitulation. Some hard-liners want a more aggressive stance.

Lou Jiwei, who retired as finance minister in 2016 but is still the head of the country’s social security fund, suggested on Sunday that China could deliberately disrupt American companies’ supply chains by halting the export of crucial components mostly made in China. But Chinese trade experts dismiss that idea as impractical and not the government’s position.

Chinese officials know what they don’t want to do. They have rejected one idea that would replace the matching tariffs with a more sophisticated system, said the people briefed on the discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the fragility of the deliberations. That response — discussed in detail within the Commerce Ministry and other agencies — would have led to lower tariffs on American goods in dollar terms, which could be seen as a fig leaf to the White House.

That approach would have recognized a potentially expensive new reality for Beijing: The tariffs may be here to stay. Mr. Trump is suffering from weak approval ratings and could lose influence in congressional elections in November. Democrats have opposed most of his agenda, but many have supported his attacks on trade with China. Even if Mr. Trump leaves office in two years, there is little guarantee that his China trade policies will be changed.

In Beijing, proponents of the new approach, which would scale down China’s tariffs in dollar terms to reflect the lopsided trade imbalance between the two countries, say Chinese leaders could still revisit the idea because it offers them a way to contain the damage and soothe tensions.

China’s leaders “don’t really want to engage in a dollar-for-dollar retaliation,” said Yu Yongding, a prominent economist at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. “Their purpose is to stop this trade war.”

the $44 billion effort by Qualcomm, the semiconductor company, to buy a Dutch chip maker. China has also pledged to buy soybeans from other countries, but replacing voluminous American supplies will be difficult.

Other moves have already served as warnings, like delays at Chinese ports. Ford Motor’s Lincoln cars and other goods have sometimes been the subject of unusually lengthy customs inspections this summer, although the delays do not appear to have caused much financial harm.

“It is certain that China will have other, invisible retaliation against the United States,” said Mei Xinyu, a researcher at the Commerce Ministry’s policy research and training academy.

But more drastic moves, like closing factories or encouraging consumer boycotts of American goods, could eliminate Chinese jobs. They could also permanently damage China’s reputation as a place to do business and only accelerate corporate plans to look to other countries.

“It’s difficult to build a reputation, and easy to harm a reputation,” Mr. Mei said.

China could also guide its currency to a weaker level against the dollar. It has already nudged the currency a bit lower, making Chinese goods cheaper in the United States and partly offsetting the tariffs. But a weaker currency would make China’s imports more expensive, raise the risk of inflation and lead to a potentially damaging flight of money out of the country. It could also provoke further American retaliation.

The trade war has hit only a small part of the Chinese economy for now, but the damage could add up. Higher tariffs on American goods raise the cost of essential imports like soybeans and microchips. China still derives a big chunk of growth from making smartphones, clothing, chemicals and a raft of other goods and selling them to Americans.

Already its currency and stock market have weakened as the trade war has intensified. China has taken steps to shore up its economy, but they could take months or years to kick in.

China has offered small concessions to the United States, like lowering its tariffs on imported cars from everywhere to 15 percent, from 25 percent; the United States, however, charges 2.5 percent. China has also allowed foreign companies to own greater shares of Chinese insurers, banks, asset management companies and car factories.

The new plan that Chinese officials rejected in recent weeks could have been more warmly greeted by the White House.

Under that plan, the United States and China would each levy tariffs based on proportions of trade rather than dollar amounts, people familiar with the discussions said. Because the United States imports nearly four times as much from China as it exports, that would lead to tariffs at different values.

For example, the United States has already levied tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese goods, one-tenth of what it imports from China. Instead of matching that with tariffs on $50 billion in American-made goods, China would levy tariffs on one-tenth of such goods, totaling $13 billion to $15 billion, depending on the details.

Proponents of the plan say letting Washington impose more tariffs than Beijing would actually hurt the United States more because tariffs are ultimately paid by consumers and businesses in the countries that levy them.

“The United States wants to hurt China by imposing tariffs on Chinese exports,” Mr. Yu, the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences economist, wrote in a journal in July. “In the end, it may be the United States itself” that is hurt, he wrote.

But other Chinese trade experts say tariffs on equal fractions of trade would be too big a compromise.

“It’s unrealistic, it’s difficult in practice, it’s not doable, and it’s against basic trade rules,” said Mr. Mei, the Commerce Ministry researcher.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/18/business/china-trade-war-retaliate.html
 
. . . .
Basically the customer is always right!
Not according to china. Stronk.

Now we are just waiting for the PDF economic 'sages' to say some versions of 'All China have to do is....' to collapse the US. :rolleyes:
Without the u.s powerful consumer market giving them 400 billion a year of trade surplus, their economy will revert back to the pre 1990s....hopelessly trying to find any client who can give them free cash of 400 billion a year like the u.s
 
.
China should have responded by selling J-20s to Iran. And then HQ-19s, if more tariffs were imposed. And so on. And did the same to Assad and Iraq. That is how you defeat Washington criminals.

Simply go after the farmers in the States too.
 
.
Not according to china. Stronk.


Without the u.s powerful consumer market giving them 400 billion a year of trade surplus, their economy will revert back to the pre 1990s....hopelessly trying to find any client who can give them free cash of 400 billion a year like the u.s
What you are saying is the absolute epitome of economic ignorance. China's exports sector is only around 18% of its national economy. And only 15% of Chinese exports go to the United States. So from simple math, you should find that the trade war impact on China would not be that big. Regarding the 400 billion dollar trade surplus, it would not be a deal-breaker for China considering that its overall trade surplus is just 1.4% of the Chinese economy. Next time, do some research before you pull this data out of your butt. If you are really located in the United States, I suggest you take Economics 101 or AP Macroeconomics again ... it would make you sound slightly more educated.
China should have responded by selling J-20s to Iran. And then HQ-19s, if more tariffs were imposed. And so on. And did the same to Assad and Iraq. That is how you defeat Washington criminals.

Simply go after the farmers in the States too.
Selling their prime fifth generation fighter to these third world countries is not conducive to any trade war resolution for China.
 
.
China should have responded by selling J-20s to Iran. And then HQ-19s, if more tariffs were imposed. And so on. And did the same to Assad and Iraq. That is how you defeat Washington criminals.

Go ahead what's stopping you. It would be the greatest shot on ones own foot
 
.
China running out of bullets. $500 billion more tariff rise to follow in January if the Chinese dont back down
First of all, it's 267 billion dollars more, not 500 billion. This round and the next round of tariffs will only hurt US companies like Apple and Qualcomm, who have huge supply chain operations in China. These chains have taken decades to establish and cannot be removed overnight. Most likely, US companies will just have to suck it up and pay that 25% tariff since they have no where else to manufacture in a short time period ... in the end, it is Trump who is shooting himself in the foot.
 
.
Selling the best weapons to the Washington criminal's enemies would stop the trade war and force negotiations.

The washington criminals want China to raise tariffs so the criminals can raise tariffs again and again. Neo-nazis run Washington now, like in Italy.
 
.
China's exports sector is only around 18% of its national economy. And only 15% of Chinese exports go to the United States.

But the problem for China is its pegging to the USD (so unfortunately that concerns 100% of its economy's valuation, esp given the US bond stockpiling needed...which is a big deal when it comes to investment and loans). i.e China has invested zilch into its own Yuan seigniorage and credibility....rather its all outsourced to USD (which is controlled by the US fed, which last time I checked takes 0 orders from China's govt).

Not to mention the tarriffs extend to by rule of origin products too, so it will be far more than the 15%.

Not to mention the labour price sensitivity of the specific kinds of products China exports to US (which is the whole reason China joined the WTO in the first place)....which is far more of an issue to the CPC than raw GVA amounts (part of the big reason why China has tariffs too instead of full 0% rates).

This is all part of the reason why Chinese Stock market is tanking big time right now. What is it 5 trillion of market cap wiped out so far?

If China isn't worried, it simply need not respond....but the fact that it did (and is now running out quickly of how to do so given limited import from US) shows there is far more going on than you know.
 
.
My path for China:

Tell the Chinese to de-invest from the States.
China de-invest from the States, including bonds.
Go to a gold backed currency.
Nationalize all businesses in China with a 50%+ stake by Amerikans.

China own's Apple's Supply chain and many other companies on wallstreet and produces them for themselves and exports them.

The goal of these neo-nazis is not just tariffs, they are after the businesses in China. They want all investments to leave China, because China is not playing "the game", the Chinese don't want to be slaves.
 
.
My path for China:

Tell the Chinese to de-invest from the States.
China de-invest from the States, including bonds.
Go to a gold backed currency.
Nationalize all businesses in China with a 50% stake by Amerikans.

The goal of these neo-nazis is not just tariffs, they are after the businesses in China.

Hope they listen to you, thats a great way to shrink Chinese GDP by at least 3 times if not more.
 
.
taxing your own companies and people. amelilka it so stronk! great gain! jai turd!:yahoo:

the US is importing more and more from china even with now more expensive, china on the other hand is importing less. amalika is winning.. china is doomed.. great again.. :D
 
.
What you are saying is the absolute epitome of economic ignorance. China's exports sector is only around 18% of its national economy. And only 15% of Chinese exports go to the United States. So from simple math, you should find that the trade war impact on China would not be that big. Regarding the 400 billion dollar trade surplus, it would not be a deal-breaker for China considering that its overall trade surplus is just 1.4% of the Chinese economy. Next time, do some research before you pull this data out of your butt. If you are really located in the United States, I suggest you take Economics 101 or AP Macroeconomics again ... it would make you sound slightly more educated.

Selling their prime fifth generation fighter to these third world countries is not conducive to any trade war resolution for China.
Obviously u have not taken any economics class. The riple effect of losing 400 billion of trade surplus means that your economy will lose 2 trillions if we take the multiplier effect of spending 80% and saving 20% for 1 dollar of trade surplus china earns. Welcome to the reality of losing 2 trilion of your economy
 
.
Back
Top Bottom