Trade War with China

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nutrient

Junior Member
Registered Member
As China is by far the largest single market for semiconductors, the growth rate will likely stay high.

I wanted to convert "As China is by far the largest single market for semiconductors" into a link, but ran out of edit time. So here is the link that backs up the assertion above:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


In fact, China's IC market is already larger than the rest of the world combined: 60% for China, 40% for the rest of the world. So you can see why China's government wants a big domestic IC manufacturing industry, and why China is unlikely to yield to U.S. demands to curtail the industry's development, regardless of what else is happening in the trade war.
 
now I read
11:54, 06-Mar-2019
What misconceptions pervade China-U.S. trade talks?
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China's Commerce Minister Zhong Shan gave a brief press conference at the "Ministers' Corridor" during the ongoing annual meeting of the National People's Congress, where he called for a joint effort by China and the U.S. in reaching a trade agreement. His remarks helped debunk false narratives surrounding the ongoing China-U.S. trade talks.

Three principles for trade negotiation

Commerce Minister Zhong Shan laid out three principles on the China-U.S. trade negotiations, which could be seen as an elaboration of China's commitment to the "principled cooperation."

The first principle is the joint effort. Zhong called the two sides to join the effort in delivering the important consensus reached between the two presidents in Buenos Aires, which is aimed at resolving trade disputes through consultations instead of imposing new tariffs. It means that successful trade negotiations require both sides to demonstrate sincerity and credibility.

The second principle is mutual respect and mutual benefit. Zhong stressed that the two sides need to respect each other's social systems and development models while striving for a win-win outcome. He also attributed the fruitful negotiation last month to the two sides' commitment to this principle.

The third principle is seeking common ground while reserving differences. Zhong talked candidly about the difficult negotiations due to differences in political system, culture, and development stages of the two countries, and asked both sides to cherish the valuable progress and meet each other halfway in future talks.

Two popular, but false narratives

As China and the U.S. are working hard to finalize a trade deal, there emerged two popular narratives in the U.S. policy circle about the ongoing trade negotiations.

One can be called Trumpism, which congratulates President Trump on his tariff tactics in creating leverage against China. The Trumpists praise the president's courage in confronting China and urged him to pressure China further into unilateral concession. Some even called U.S. Congress to pass the "Reciprocal Trade Act," which would give the president unfettered discretion to raise U.S. tariffs against imports from other countries.

The other can be called Defeatism, which criticized the U.S. for being outmaneuvered by China. They fear President Trump's desire to make a hasty China-U.S. trade deal would let China off easily. Thus, they advocate for a more hawkish stance toward China and urge the president not to kowtow to China.

Different on the surface though, the two narratives share many false premises. Zhong's remarks helped debunk these narratives.

Misconceptions

Both narratives err in several aspects and risk leading to bad decisions if followed blindly.

First of all, they are premised on inequality. The narratives give the false hope that the U.S. could easily bully another country into trade concessions. Many people are even comparing the current China-U.S. trade dispute to the U.S.-Japan dispute in the 1980s. This analogy has some merit in that both cases highlight how the U.S. is practicing trade bullying. But since China is not Japan, it is wrong to expect a "Plaza Accord" and "voluntary export restraints" on the part of China.

Second, they make a false dichotomy of "all or nothing." Negotiation is not a one-way street, but a give-and-take process. Unilateral imposition of tariffs is an inefficient and ineffective way in trade negotiations and would be unlikely to deliver on a "winner-take-all" platform. It would especially be naive and wrong for the U.S. to expect China to make concessions on the non-negotiables.

Third, they are based on a zero-sum mentality. Trade negotiations should not be about relatives, but about absolutes. They should not be about how to carve a cake, but about how to make the cake bigger. A good trade deal would be positive-sum in that it would help the U.S. to redress outstanding imbalances in its trade relations with China, help China to make desirable economic restructuring and further its opening-up and reform policy, and also boost international trade and market confidence around the world.

Zhong's remarks indicated optimism, and also sent important signals of goodwill and resolve at this crucial stage of bilateral trade negotiations.

In this increasingly interconnected world, no one can come out of a trade war unscathed. Due to the China- U.S. trade tensions, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has already adjusted down expectations for global economic growth this year. A failure to reach a trade deal would send shock waves across financial markets around the world.

Given the high stakes, it is imperative for both sides to seize the momentum created by the last round of high-level negotiations, resolve the outstanding issues in a constructive and incremental way, and return the bilateral trade relations to the normal.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Instead of narrowing the trade deficit with China hit a record of 420 billion in spite of tariff

US trade deficit hits 10-year high
Analysis shows that a trade deal with China cannot realistically help close the gap

ByASIA TIMES STAFF

President Donald Trump’s mission to eliminate the US trade deficit with the world has so far been a colossal failure, official data showed on Monday, with the gap rising to a 10-year high.

To top it off, the deficit in goods with China reached an all-time high. And despite hype for a potential trade deal with Beijing that could chip away at the bilateral trade imbalance, there is good reason to be skeptical that an agreement could significantly change the relationship.

When it comes to commodities – specifically liquefied natural gas and agricultural products – there is room for a long-term increase in exports to China. That would mean China shifting its supply chains from other trading partners and could have a material impact on the deficit. But as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
at the Council on Foreign Relations, it would not come close to making up the difference, and in other crucial areas, China has made it clear it is committed to importing less from the US.


“To bring the bilateral goods deficit down to zero, US goods exports would need to grow from $170 billion to somewhere north of $600 billion: a lot of export categories need to more than triple over six years (e.g. the 2024 level would need to be 4 times current exports),” Setser notes.

Goods-Baseline-vs.-Exports-to-Close-Deficit.png


Unfortunately, when you take out commodities, a lot of categories are off limits. That includes autos, aircraft and semiconductors. In each of those cases, China will more likely than not gradually replace US products with domestic ones over time.

It doesn’t stop there. In areas such as high-tech medical equipment, China also has aggressive plans to replace US products. Beijing has designs on increasing the use of domestically produced devices in hospitals to 70% by 2025,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

While reports have suggested that China will make cosmetic changes to its Made in China 2025 program, observers –
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
– say that they won’t make big changes to their industrial policy.

One thing that might help narrow the gap incrementally is a slowing US economy and economic stimulus in China. There is widespread agreement among economists that the trade deficit is a function of underlying economic trends – not trade policy – and the recent increase in the deficit is evidence of this. Economic tailwinds in the US, including the tax cut stimulus, helped increase US consumption and imports.

But even if China’s stimulus helps boost its purchases of US goods, a dramatic reversal of the trend seems unlikely.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
The trade deficit has deteriorated despite the White House's protectionist trade policy
File: Evan Vucci/AP
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The United States trade deficit surged to a 10-year high in 2018, with the politically sensitive shortfall with China hitting a record peak, despite the Trump administration slapping tariffs on a range of imported goods in an effort to shrink the gap.

The US Department of Commerce said on Wednesday that an 18.8 percent jump in the trade deficit in December had contributed to the $621bn shortfall last year. The 2018 deficit was the largest since 2008, and followed a $552.3bn gap in 2017.
The trade deficit has deteriorated despite the White House's protectionist trade policy, which President Donald Trump said is needed to shield manufacturers in the US from what he says is unfair foreign competition.

The US last year imposed tariffs on $250bn worth of goods imported from China, with Beijing hitting back with duties on $11bn worth of American products, including soya beans and other commodities.
Trump has delayed tariffs on $200bn worth of Chinese imports as negotiations to resolve the eight-month trade war continue.

The US has also slapped duties on imported steel, aluminium, solar panels and washing machines. The goods trade deficit with China increased 11.6 percent to an all-time high of $419.2bn in 2018. The US had record imports from 60 countries in 2018, led by China, Mexico and Germany. Imports of goods hit a record $2.6 trillion last year.

An acceleration in economic growth in 2018 from Trump's debt-funded tax cuts helped to boost the appetite for foreign goods.
The December trade deficit of $59.8bn was the largest since October 2008, and overshot economists' expectations for a $57.9bn shortfall, as exports fell for a third straight month and imports rebounded. The release of the December report was delayed by a 35-day partial shutdown of the government that ended on January 25.

When adjusted for inflation, the goods trade deficit surged $10bn to a record $91.6bn in December. The jump in the so-called "real goods" trade deficit suggests that trade likely drained the fourth-quarter gross domestic product more than initially estimated by the government.

The government reported last week that trade subtracted 0.22 of a percentage point from GDP growth in the fourth quarter. The economy grew at a 2.6 percent annualised rate in the October-December quarter, slowing from the third quarter's brisk 3.4 percent pace of growth.
The downbeat trade data - along with weak retail sales, construction spending, housing starts and business spending on equipment - set the economy on a low-growth trajectory in the first quarter.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
It is hardly surprising Trump's tariffs failed so far. You have to see that even if those companies move manufacturing away from China they will likely go somewhere else in Southeast Asia like Vietnam. Not to the US. So no, those jobs won't move back to the US this way. Also, to a large degree, the move of those lower value companies away from China had already started years ago, like a decade ago or more in the case of light industry.

Remember when US economical analysts in the press were laughing at the Chinese counter tariffs? Well they aren't laughing now. It's one thing to get 10% tariffs on a $100 USD iPhone with $80 USD in parts. Most of which produced outside China where the major profits also get siphoned out. It is another thing to get 10% tariffs on perishable agricultural products wholly produced in the USA.

With regards to the steel or aluminium sectors, China imports most of the raw minerals to produce steel. So I doubt they get such a major profit from it. This is a high pollution industry so there would be even more costs than some presume. The aluminium sector is highly dependent on low cost electricity to do electrolysis. That is one of the reasons why Russia is a major exporter. Because they have cheap energy. Or why even US firms like Alcoa have major production facilities outside the US. If the US won't build the infrastructure to produce cheap electricity those companies will go elsewhere.

I expected the trade deficit to increase. After all the tariffs were announced in advance so a lot of customers simply increased their purchases before they hit. In the long term they should reduce imports from China, but it seems the US political class fears the possible repercussions of decreased purchasing power more than the Chinese. It is little wonder. For the US to do what Trump called for it would require massive austerity measures which US citizens would balk at.
 
Last edited:

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
won't be long before they consider trade deficits to be a good thing and call this a win, since it seems impossible to bring it down unless something catastrophic happens
 

Quickie

Colonel
Huawei Brews Up Another PR Gimmick: ‘Meng Come Home’ Coffee Cups
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is waging a legal and public relations battle on a growing number of fronts. That global offensive has strayed into beverages.


China’s largest technology company has found a novel way to campaign on behalf of finance chief Meng Wanzhou, who’s in Canada awaiting possible extradition to the U.S. During a multi-day press event at its Shenzhen headquarters this week, visitors found paper coffee cups bearing a scarlet-hued shoreline at sunset and the slogan: “The lighthouse is waiting. Wanzhou please come home.” The cups -- which turned up at Huawei HQ in December -- play on Meng’s Chinese first name, which can also mean “late-arriving boat.”

It’s just one small part of a multi-pronged charm offensive that seeks to squelch U.S. accusations that its communications equipment helps Beijing spy on foreign powers. In recent weeks, reclusive founder Ren Zhengfei emerged to defend his company in media interviews, while his top lieutenants showed off the company’s technological capabilities and fought back against American criticisms.

Huawei has also embarked on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
In Canada, Meng sued the government for allegedly violating her constitutional rights as she was being arrested in December on bank fraud charges. This week, the Chinese technology giant intends to file a lawsuit claiming the U.S. government is overstepping by barring Huawei from competing to supply equipment for certain federal agencies, Bloomberg News reported.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

zgx09t

Junior Member
Registered Member
Japanese too are being roped in to a currency provision. Just like China, Japan would in all likelihood would say no.

“China’s concessions probably won’t be very big because a lot of their demands are what we already plan to reform,” Lou, who was finance minister until 2016.

China Won't Make Big Concessions on Trade Deal, Ex-Minister Says
Bloomberg News
March 6, 2019, 6:45 PM GMT+9

China won’t make big concessions to the U.S. in order to seal a trade deal, former finance minister Lou Jiwei said in Beijing on Wednesday, calling some U.S. demands for change "unreasonable."

“China’s concessions probably won’t be very big because a lot of their demands are what we already plan to reform,” Lou, who was finance minister until 2016 and now runs the social security fund, said in an interview on the sidelines of the National People’s Congress. Some U.S. demands are “just nitpicking," he said.
Annual Meetings Of The International Monetary Fund And World Bank

Lou Jiwei
Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg

China and the U.S. are nearing the finish line on a trade deal that could be signed by Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping as early as this month, though there is still a risk either side could walk away. The U.S. wants China follow through on pledges ranging from better protecting intellectual-property rights to buying more American products before Trump removes additional tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods.

The two sides are still negotiating and it will take more effort to reach an agreement, Commerce Minister Zhong Shan said on Tuesday. While substantial progress has been made, work remains to be done, Ning Jizhe, a member of the Chinese trade delegation and head of the country’s statistics bureau said Wednesday.

Sticking Points

Lawmakers will vote on a foreign investment law next Friday which includes measures to protect the IP of foreign companies and ease pressure on them to transfer technology to local partners, an effort to address U.S. concerns. Beijing has also already reportedly agreed to several conditions, including boosting its imports of agriculture goods and keeping the yuan stable, a commitment that could prove controversial.

China must reject U.S. demands to keep the yuan stable against the greenback as part of a trade deal, though it can commit to not maintain it at an artificially low level, former People’s Bank of China adviser Yu Yongding wrote in an opinion piece last week.

A prospective deal can’t put all the burden of proof that agreements are being carried out on Beijing, former Chinese officials with experience of dealing with the U.S. have said, warning that the “strong enforcement language” Trump has pledged will be seen as unfair unless it also binds the U.S. to address China’s own grievances.

“Consensus can be reached in the trade war,” Jiangsu Province representative Fei Shaoyun said in an interview echoing much of what Lou said. “Many of the conditions we are negotiating now are also what we need to do in reform and opening up. We also have our timetable, and don’t need to make concessions.”

— With assistance by Miao Han, Emma Dong, Heng Xie, and Shuping Niu

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China GDP overstated by 12%, new research says

China’s economy is around 12 per cent smaller than official figures indicate, and its real growth has been overstated by around 2 percentage points annually in recent years, according to new research. The findings in the paper published on Thursday by the Brookings Institution, a Washington think-tank, reinforced longstanding scepticism about Chinese official statistics. They also add to concerns that China’s slowdown is more severe than the government has acknowledged. Even based on official data, China’s economy grew at its slowest pace since 1990 last year at 6.6 per cent. The paper’s analysis covers 2008 to 2016, so it does not contain an estimate for last year’s growth in gross domestic product or the size of the Chinese economy. But if 2018 GDP were overstated by the same degree as the authors estimated for 2016, it would imply that actual 2018 GDP was Rmb10.8tn ($1.6tn) below the official figure of Rmb90tn. The Chinese government’s emphasis on numerical targets — a legacy of Maoist state planning — has made growth in GDP a politically sensitive figure. The Communist party evaluates local cadres’ performance based largely on growth in their respective regions.
http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.upp-prod-eu.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fd76df3e8-3fe0-11e9-b896-fe36ec32aece


Original paper:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The Chinese government’s emphasis on numerical targets — a legacy of Maoist state planning — has made growth in GDP a politically sensitive figure.

Yes. I think it would have been much better to do planning based on warm fuzzy feelings instead of numerical targets. Well, not really.
Now the FT is just being silly. Of course the Chinese plan their economy like this. That's the thing with having engineers in charge of the system instead of demagogues. The Chinese begin construction on four AP1000 nuclear reactors and they finish it and put them in operation. In the US you begin construction on four AP1000 nuclear reactors similar in all aspects, two get cancelled, two get delayed and who knows when they'll be finished. Meanwhile the shells of the now abandoned nuclear reactor construction sites stand as a testament to monumental waste and lack of planning skills.

Is it a surprise that China is growing faster than the US? Seriously.

This isn't rocket science. There are ways to model and plan these sorts of investments. In fact, it's where planned economics excel, massive infrastructure investments.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top