logo
Exclusive: US-China trade truce leaves military-use rare earth issue unresolved, sources say

Exclusive: US-China trade truce leaves military-use rare earth issue unresolved, sources say

Reuters9 hours ago

BEIJING/SINGAPORE, June 15 (Reuters) - The renewed U.S.-China trade truce struck in London left a key area of export restrictions tied to national security untouched, an unresolved conflict that threatens a more comprehensive deal, two people briefed on detailed outcomes of the talks told Reuters.
Beijing has not committed to grant export clearance for some specialized rare-earth magnets that U.S. military suppliers need for fighter jets and missile systems, the people said. The United States maintains export curbs on China's purchases of advanced artificial intelligence chips out of concern that they also have military applications.
At talks in London last week, China's negotiators appeared to link progress in lifting export controls on military-use rare earth magnets with the longstanding U.S. curbs on exports of the most advanced AI chips to China. That marked a new twist in trade talks that began with opioid trafficking, tariff rates and China's trade surplus, but have since shifted to focus on export controls.
In addition, U.S. officials also signalled they are looking to extend existing tariffs on China for a further 90 days beyond the August 10 deadline agreed in Geneva last month, both sources said, suggesting a more permanent trade deal between the world's two largest economies is unlikely before then.
The two people who spoke to Reuters about the London talks requested not to be named because both sides have tightly controlled disclosure. The White House, State Department and Department of Commerce did not immediately respond to requests for comment. China's Foreign and Commerce ministries did not respond to faxed requests for comment.
President Donald Trump said on Wednesday the handshake deal reached in London between American and Chinese negotiators was a "great deal," adding, "we have everything we need, and we're going to do very well with it. And hopefully they are too."
And U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said there would be no "quid pro quo" on easing curbs on exports of AI chips to China in exchange for access to rare earths.
But China's chokehold on the rare earth magnets needed for weapons systems remains a potential flashpoint.
China dominates global production of rare earths and holds a virtual monopoly on refining and processing.
A deal reached in Geneva last month to reduce bilateral tariffs from crushing triple-digit levels had faltered over Beijing's restrictions on critical minerals exports that took shape in April.
That prompted the Trump administration to respond with export controls preventing shipments of semiconductor design software, jet engines for Chinese-made planes and other goods to China.
At the London talks, China promised to fast-track approval of rare-earth export applications from non-military U.S. manufacturers out of the tens of thousands currently pending, one of the sources said. Those licenses will have a six-month term. Beijing also offered to set up a "green channel" for expediting license approvals from trusted U.S. companies.
Initial signals were positive, with Chinese rare-earths magnet producer JL MAG Rare-Earth (300748.SZ), opens new tab, saying on Wednesday it had obtained export licences that included the United States, while China's Commerce Ministry confirmed it had approved some "compliant applications" for export licences.
But China has not budged on specialized rare earths, including samarium, which are needed for military applications and are outside the fast-track agreed in London, the two people said. Automakers and other manufacturers largely need other rare earth magnets, including dysprosium and terbium.
The rushed trade meeting in London followed a call last week between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Trump said U.S. tariffs would be set at 55% for China, while China had agreed to 10% from the United States.
Trump initially imposed tariffs on China as punishment for its massive trade surplus to the United States and over what he says is Beijing's failure to stem the flow of the powerful opioid fentanyl into the U.S.
Chinese analysts are pessimistic about the likelihood of further breakthroughs before the August 10 deadline agreed in Geneva.
"Temporary mutual accommodation of some concerns is possible but the fundamental issue of the trade imbalance cannot be resolved within this timeframe, and possibly during Trump's remaining term," said Liu Weidong, a U.S.-China expert at the Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
An extension of the August deadline could allow the Trump administration more time to establish an alternative legal claim for setting higher tariffs on China under the Section 301 authority of the USTR in case Trump loses the ongoing legal challenge to the tariffs in U.S. court, one of the people with knowledge of the London talks said.
The unresolved issues underscore the difficulty the Trump administration faces in pushing its trade agenda with China because of Beijing's control of rare earths and its willingness to use that as leverage with Washington, said Ryan Hass, director of the John L. Thornton China Center at the Brookings Institution.
"It has taken the Trump team a few punches in the nose to recognise that they will no longer be able to secure another trade agreement with China that disproportionately addresses Trump's priorities," Hass said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Vietnam says US trade talks made progress but key issues are unresolved
Vietnam says US trade talks made progress but key issues are unresolved

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

Vietnam says US trade talks made progress but key issues are unresolved

HANOI, June 15 (Reuters) - Vietnam and the United States made progress during a third round of trade negotiations last week, but critical issues remain unresolved, requiring further analysis and continued dialogue, Vietnam's trade ministry said on Sunday. The talks, in Washington, D.C. from June 9-12, were held as a pause on 46% "reciprocal" tariffs on Vietnamese exports approaches expiration in early July, adding pressure on both sides to reach a compromise. Vietnam's trade surplus with the United States surged to $12.2 billion in May, up nearly 42% year-on-year and 17% higher than April, Vietnamese government data showed. Exports to the U.S. climbed 42% from a year earlier to $13.8 billion, hitting a post-pandemic high. U.S. negotiators have submitted a list of trade demands to Hanoi, which Vietnamese officials described as "tough," including measures aimed at reducing Vietnam's reliance on Chinese imports of industrial materials and components. Vietnam's trade ministry said on Sunday the delegations had narrowed gaps on issues outlined in Vietnam's response to the U.S. requests and worked toward mutually acceptable solutions. Both sides agreed to hold an online meeting in the coming days between Vietnam's trade minister Nguyen Hong Dien and U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick to address unresolved issues, the ministry added. The last round of talks was held between Dien, Lutnick and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, a format proposed by the United States. Under pressure from Washington, Hanoi has recently cracked down on illegal transshipment - typically when cargo is moved between ships during transit - of goods primarily from China. It has also expressed willingness to lower non-tariff barriers and increase imports of U.S. goods such as planes, farm products, and energy, though no purchase agreements have been announced.

Chancellor dismisses 'hurt feelings' after PM's U-turn on grooming gangs inquiry
Chancellor dismisses 'hurt feelings' after PM's U-turn on grooming gangs inquiry

Sky News

timean hour ago

  • Sky News

Chancellor dismisses 'hurt feelings' after PM's U-turn on grooming gangs inquiry

The chancellor has refused to say if the government will apologise for dismissing calls for a national public inquiry into grooming gangs after the prime minister U-turned on the matter last night. Rachel Reeves told Sky News Sir Keir Starmer changed his mind after a government-requested audit into the scale of grooming gangs across the country concluded a nationwide probe was necessary. But she said the most important thing is to focus on the victims, not the "hurt feelings" of how others may have been spoken about. Speaking to Sky's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, Ms Reeves said one of the reasons the prime minister changed his mind on the need for a statutory public inquiry is to ensure that "people are compelled to give evidence", which local inquiries do not have the power to do. The chancellor was then asked if there will be an apology to people who were criticised by ministers for "talking total nonsense", spreading "misinformation", and were accused of jumping on an extremist "bandwagon". She replied: "What is the most important thing here? It is the victims, and it's not people's hurt feelings about how they have been spoken about." 3:31 What has the PM previously said? The prime minister has been sharply criticised for his comments about people calling for a statutory public inquiry. He said on 6 January: "What I won't tolerate is this discussion and debate based on lies without calling it out. What I won't tolerate is politicians jumping on the bandwagon simply to get attention. "When those politicians sat in government for 14 long years tweeting, talking, but not doing anything about [it]. Now, so desperate for attention that they're amplifying what the far right is saying." But Ms Reeves defended the prime minister's handling of the issue, saying he pledged to implement all 20 recommendations from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), criminal convictions are now at "a record high", and that he brought the first convictions for grooming when he served as director of public prosecutions. 3:31 Sir Keir confirmed last night that he will now be ordering a full statutory inquiry into the grooming gangs scandal. The full report from Baroness Louise Casey is set to be published on Monday, and the home secretary is expected to make a statement to parliament. He told reporters travelling with him to the G7 summit in Canada: "[Baroness Casey's] position when she started the audit was that there was not a real need for a national inquiry over and above what was going on. "She has looked at the material... and she has come to the view that there should be a national inquiry on the basis of what she has seen. I have read every single word of her report, and I am going to accept her recommendation. That is the right thing to do on the basis of what she has put in her audit. "I asked her to do that job to double check on this; she has done that job for me, and having read her report... I shall now implement her recommendations." What will the report say? The near 200-page report is to be published next week and is expected to warn that white British girls were "institutionally ignored for fear of racism". One person familiar with the report said it details the institutional failures in treating young girls and cites a decade of lost action from the IICSA, set up in 2014 to investigate grooming gangs in Rotherham. The report is also expected to link illegal immigration with the exploitation of young girls. The grooming gang scandal came back into the headlines at the beginning of the year after Elon Musk attacked Sir Keir and safeguarding minister Jess Philips for failing children. The prime minister and Ms Phillips hit back, with Sir Keir citing his record of prosecuting abusers as director of public prosecutions, while Ms Phillips has long been a campaigner against domestic violence.

Tariff dodgers take big risks to cut small corners
Tariff dodgers take big risks to cut small corners

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

Tariff dodgers take big risks to cut small corners

If you put up a barrier, people will find a way around it. So its not shocking to read recent news stories about how some businesses are trying to skirt around tariffs – particularly from China. They're shipping goods through third countries, rather than directly from China, using special 'shoppers' to skirt minimum quantity amounts, colluding with suppliers to falsify country-of-origin labels, undervaluing goods, or 'assembling' products out of China where tariffs are lower. They're creating shell companies in more tariff-friendly countries and even going so far as forging certificates of origin (thanks ChatGPT!) and otherwise falsifying shipping documentation in collusion with, or independently from, their suppliers. I get it. Whether you're a supporter or not of the administration's tariff policies, you're still likely fed up with Donald Trump's almost daily changes of his mind, the court cases, the lack of process, the chaos, the Tweets (sorry Xs, no, wait Truths). It's not as if businesses don't do this stuff all the time. For thousands of years, butchers have been putting their fingers on the scale; middlemen pocketed a few stolen pennies or denarii or drachmas behind their customers' backs. I have clients who regularly undervalue (or even hide) their inventory, keep two sets of books, fail to report cash receipts, run their personal expenses through their companies. The list goes on. But none of this is a great idea. As a certified public accountant, I have a professional obligation to not only point this kind of behavior out to my clients but to disengage from providing services to those who are breaking the law, or at the very least demonstrating a significant lack of ethics. I warn them about the downsides: the penalties, the fines, the potential jail time for criminal behavior. I try to make them understand that behaving this way risks ruining relationships with suppliers, customers, partners and employees. If caught it's both professionally and personally humiliating and not the kind of PR that will benefit your company. And it definitely upsets those in the community who are doing their best to abide by the law. And when it comes to tariffs, there are other – legal – ways to either avoid or reduce their impact on your business. You could use bonded or free trade zone warehouses. You could raise prices, cut other costs, invest in technologies. You can use new resources from the Small Business Administration to find domestic suppliers or lean into organizations like the World Trade Center Association to find alternate suppliers in more tariff-friendly locales. And yet, I know – and read – of a not-insignificant number of business people who insist on just skirting the law. Why? It's down to risk. Every decision one makes when running a business – or living your life – involves a risk/reward analysis. Rolling out a new product? It's possible no one buys it. Investing in a piece of property? Getting on an airplane? Crossing the street? We all take risks every day because we want the rewards. Some people have a higher tolerance for this stuff. Those are the ones playing the tariff lottery, risking that their number won't get picked. The business people I know who are willing to take these risks – even if they're on dubious legal grounds – all have a reason to back up their actions. Maybe they were 'completely ignorant, innocent or naïve' about the law. Or they come up with some legal explanation for their actions, regardless of how flimsy or far-fetched. Some of them have no problem throwing their supplier or employee or customer under the bus and then sleeping like a baby that night. They don't just hope that no one finds out. They have a story to tell. Personally, this is not for me. I'm not a big risk taker. And, like most people, I'm a pretty bad liar.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store