Following a roughly 20-month trade dispute, the US and China finally declared a truce on Dec. 13 through a “phase one” trade deal, which would have the US cancel planned tariffs on US$160 billion of Chinese imports — including smartphones, toys and consumer electronics — that were set to go into effect on Sunday last week.
The US has also agreed to reduce tariffs on US$120 billion out of US$300 billion of Chinese goods affected since Sept. 1 from 15 percent to 7.5 percent.
However, previously imposed tariffs of 25 percent on roughly US$250 billion of Chinese goods, such as machinery, electronics and furniture, remain in place. In exchange, China has committed to a minimum of US$200 billion in increased purchases of US products and services over the next two years, including US$32 billion in agricultural goods.
Despite differences in the content of the announcements from Washington and Beijing on the terms of the preliminary agreement, both sides consider themselves winners. Yet, is it a win-win for everyone? Economists and trade experts have polarized views on the matter.
At first glance, it looks as if the US would benefit from this deal, as existing tariffs with a big increase in Chinese purchases would help lower the trade deficit with China. However, compared with last year’s US$419.2 billion US-China trade deficit, the benefit is utterly inadequate.
Some people believe the US putting the brakes on new tariffs and agreeing to reduce existing ones in exchange for a large amount of Chinese purchases would help US President Donald Trump’s re-election bid. However, Beijing does not give specific commitments in the agreement, which gives it a brief respite from growing economic headwinds, while questions over whether it will honor its pledge remain unanswered.
Even though China has promised to include intellectual property, technology transfer, financial services, currency and foreign exchange issues in the next round of talks, there are no signs of progress with regards to structural reforms or other changes to its economic and trade regime, such as industry policy, government subsidies or state-owned enterprises, which are major concerns for Washington in terms of technology and national security.
For the time being, the US and China can claim to be winners, but as long as Beijing’s structural problems are not resolved, the trade row is likely to persist and might evolve into a long-term technology competition, as well as a political rivalry between a democracy and an authoritarian state.
Moreover, the next phase of trade talks is likely to fall apart sooner or later, considering that the negotiations have been conducted in fits and starts over the past two years. So long as the trade row continues, there is unlikely to be a significant improvement for Chinese and Taiwanese businesses, which still need to hasten their global production adjustment plans to diversify risks.
In the meantime, as concerns over credit and investment quality in China increase with the slowdown of the Chinese economy, Taiwanese financial institutions need to further reduce their exposure to China, which was as high as NT$1.73 trillion (US$57.27 billion) at the end of September, equivalent to 0.49 times the industry’s net value, Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) data showed.
While US-China trade tensions have eased, they have not ended, so business uncertainties remain. China’s financial crisis must also not be ignored. The FSC must closely monitor the changes in banks’ exposure to China and step up its risk management measures.
Chinese state-owned companies COSCO Shipping Corporation and China Merchants have a 30 percent stake in Kaohsiung Port’s Kao Ming Container Terminal (Terminal No. 6) and COSCO leases Berths 65 and 66. It is extremely dangerous to allow Chinese companies or state-owned companies to operate critical infrastructure. Deterrence theorists are familiar with the concepts of deterrence “by punishment” and “by denial.” Deterrence by punishment threatens an aggressor with prohibitive costs (like retaliation or sanctions) that outweigh the benefits of their action, while deterrence by denial aims to make an attack so difficult that it becomes pointless. Elbridge Colby, currently serving as the Under
The Ministry of the Interior on Thursday last week said it ordered Internet service providers to block access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (小紅書, also known as RedNote in English) for a year, citing security risks and more than 1,700 alleged fraud cases on the platform since last year. The order took effect immediately, abruptly affecting more than 3 million users in Taiwan, and sparked discussions among politicians, online influencers and the public. The platform is often described as China’s version of Instagram or Pinterest, combining visual social media with e-commerce, and its users are predominantly young urban women,
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi lit a fuse the moment she declared that trouble for Taiwan means trouble for Japan. Beijing roared, Tokyo braced and like a plot twist nobody expected that early in the story, US President Donald Trump suddenly picked up the phone to talk to her. For a man who normally prefers to keep Asia guessing, the move itself was striking. What followed was even more intriguing. No one outside the room knows the exact phrasing, the tone or the diplomatic eyebrow raises exchanged, but the broad takeaway circulating among people familiar with the call was this: Trump did