However, there are also tariffs that the Trump administration will impose on China (and tariffs during his previous term as the U.S. President). As the matter of fact, the Biden administration already has imposed many tariffs (including those from the first President Trump) on China. China has also purchased large amounts of certain agricultural products from countries like Brazil. (See, e.g., Ref. 1) China has also taken certain counter measures, such as forbidding or restricting trade of certain rare earth elements to the U.S. (see, e.g, Ref. 2). Some of these rare earth elements have military and technology applications.
Recently I also just read an article in the Foreign Times (Ref. 3) that “by tying subsidies to technology transfers and local production requirements, Brussels ensures that Chinese companies contribute to the EU’s industrial base rather than merely exporting batteries. This approach mirrors other global trade practices, The US Inflation Reduction Act, for example, ties clean energy subsidies to domestic content. Tariffs, by contrast, have done little to achieve their intended goals. Whether the U. S. will do something similar to Belgium, we will have to wait and see.
As to the U.S.’s heavy tariffs on Chinese made automobiles, especially on those automobiles which plan to meet modern emission restrictions, I don’t see how the U.S. without a change on its current position is going to solve the problem, because it is essentially China who is producing such vehicles. Either the U.S. is not going to meet these emission standards or the U.S. is going to drop such tariffs. We will just have to see how the future will evolve in front of our eyes.
References
- A. “Brazil becomes China’s largest agricultural produce trader, followed by US, Thailand, Australia,” Global Times, Jan. 31,2024. B. “Brazil, China Sign Wide-Ranging Deals, Including Agricultural Products”, Ag/Web.com (Brazil and China signed 37 deals covering agriculture, tech cooperation, trade and investments, infrastructure, industry, energy and mining, among other areas), Pro Farmer Editors, Nov. 20, 2024. C. “China’s Top Crop Trader Blunts Impact of US Trade War With Brazil Bet,” Alfred Cang, Hallie Gu and Dayanne Sousa, Yahoo/Finance, Dec 19, 2024.
- A. “China Bans Rare Mineral Exports to the U.S.,” by David Pierson, Keith Bradsher, and Ana Swanson, Dec, 3, 2024, New York Times. B. “China banned exports of a few rare minerals to the US. Things could get messier,” by Casey Crownhart, MIT Technology Review, Dec. 12, 2024. C. “China Has Banned Exports of Some Rare Minerals to the United States,” Commentary by Institute for Energy Research, Dec. 12, 2024. D. “China bans export of key minerals to U.S. as trade row deepens even before Trump’s second term,” by Haley Ott, CBS News, Dec. 4, 2024. China announced on Tuesday a ban on the export of a number of minerals with military and technology applications to the U.S., one day after the Biden administration further curbed its own exports as part of its crackdown on China’s semiconductor industry.
- Europe’s demand for Chinese tech transfers beats tariffs,” by Lizzi lee, Financial Times, December 17, 2024 (https://www.ft.com/content/4b1b7270-4725-4c88-814a-6fa85045f558). The article states that linking subsidies to intellectual property is the sort of stratigic inclusion that fosters mutual benefits.
Update on Perspective on US-China Relationship
However, there are also tariffs that the Trump administration will impose on China (and tariffs during his previous term as the U.S. President). As the matter of fact, the Biden administration already has imposed many tariffs (including those from the first President Trump) on China. China has also purchased large amounts of certain agricultural products from countries like Brazil. (See, e.g., Ref. 1) China has also taken certain counter measures, such as forbidding or restricting trade of certain rare earth elements to the U.S. (see, e.g, Ref. 2). Some of these rare earth elements have military and technology applications.
Recently I also just read an article in the Foreign Times (Ref. 3) that “by tying subsidies to technology transfers and local production requirements, Brussels ensures that Chinese companies contribute to the EU’s industrial base rather than merely exporting batteries. This approach mirrors other global trade practices, The US Inflation Reduction Act, for example, ties clean energy subsidies to domestic content. Tariffs, by contrast, have done little to achieve their intended goals. Whether the U. S. will do something similar to Belgium, we will have to wait and see.
As to the U.S.’s heavy tariffs on Chinese made automobiles, especially on those automobiles which plan to meet modern emission restrictions, I don’t see how the U.S. without a change on its current position is going to solve the problem, because it is essentially China who is producing such vehicles. Either the U.S. is not going to meet these emission standards or the U.S. is going to drop such tariffs. We will just have to see how the future will evolve in front of our eyes.
References