Unquestionably, the US-China trade deal is beneficial. People who have criticized the Trump taxes are pleased to see it, like me. However, it’s certainly a wonderful thing, despite what it is. And it’s undoubtedly hardly a victory for the leader.
It’s good because, if we had adhered to the trade-war tariffs, which are ours at 145 % and theirs at 125 %, then commerce between the nations would have almost stopped completely.
Routine commerce, including agricultural trade, will at least be possible at the new levels of 30 % and 10 %, but it will be challenging in many cases. Instead, the US can concentrate on reducing its reliance on China for important goods that it can’t already obtain elsewhere. That ought to be the primary objective.
Some business is good, while others is bad. The US doesn’t like “generalized decoupling” from China, as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent put it. It desires” corporate decoupling.”
Financial markets were pleased that Peter Navarro, the White House secretary, was the crucial figure behind the enormous tariffs on China and other nations, was speaking for the management on tariffs this period.
The agreement also raises the possibility of further improvements to US-China business agreements as discussions progress. For instance, American farmers and ranchers would like to see China’s taxes and other obstacles to US agricultural goods completely eliminated.
Because it’s simply a 90-day expulsion, the tariff levels are still very large and imposed on both important and non-critical products, which is not a good thing.
More important, it’s not great because the management is also wasting the chance by coordinating China’s taxes and professional plans with our allies, which would have the best chance of reducing America’s dangerous dependence on China.
China is investing heavily to advance its position in global developing. China wants to concentrate on the rest of the world for very little and had the rest of the world rely on it for a lot of non-critical products, including many from metal to electronics.
By accumulating significant manufacturing capacity, it achieves scale levels that prevent unusual competitors from being able to meet its prices.
There is general agreement on whether or not this will harm the US. Additionally, it presents a threat to conventional US allies like Japan, South Korea, the European Union, Canada, and others. No country can defend itself by acting only, as I’ve already made clear in my previous post. China’s rewards on a level are simply too great.
The administration treats friends as if they were enemies, not to coordinate tax and professional policies with allies. Our “reciprocal” tax on Chinese goods has increased by 24 %. The most significant trade of Japan is autos, which are subject to 25 % tariffs. 20 % of our “reciprocal” price on the European Union.
Although the tariffs are no mutual in the traditional sense of the word, the different countries aren’t imposing the similar tariff on US exports.
China’s 90-day “reciprocal” tariff, on the other hand, includes a 20 % penalty tariff on fentanyl, while the 30 % tariff, on the other hand, includes 10 %. China has indicated that it is willing to impose restrictions on morphine. If it does, China might receive lower US taxes than Japan or the EU.
That would not be ideal.
The supervision is undoubtedly referring to the deal as a success. However, the Chinese believe that the success is ours. They are correct.
Chinese President Xi Jinping didn’t back down or sigh when Trump imposed the 145 % taxes in the first few days of April. He responded by imposing 12 % tariffs on US imports. He advised Taiwanese people to get ready for a business war.
Trump acknowledged that the tariffs would have to go down because he realized the Chinese were ready to tough it out and faced nervous financial markets and miserable American businesses. The final agreement his negotiators finally reached just reversed each team’s price levels by 115 portion points. There were no Chinese agreements involved.
According to the Wall Street Journal editorial section, the agreement represented a “major flee” by the administration and a “win for financial reality.”
Trump’s taxes on supporters have eroded trust in the US. This hope that it’s not too late to correct the error and win at least some more people’s respect.
Both the US and its allies cannot manage to rely on China for important goods. Working with our friends rather than against them is the best way to prevent that from occurring.
Urban Lehner, a former long-time Asia journalist and director for the Wall Street Journal, is DTN/The Progressive Farmer’s editor emeritus.
This post, which was originally published on May 14 by the latter news business and is now being republished by Asia Times with authority, is entitled” Copyright 2025 DTN/The Progressive Farmer.” All trademarks are reserved. Follow , Urban Lehner , on , X @urbanize ,