Several US executives to visit China this week: sources
The visit coincides with the latest round of U.S.‑China trade negotiations in Sweden, where China's Vice Premier He Lifeng is meeting U.S. officials from July 27 to July 30 for a new round of economic and trade talks.
The delegation will be led by FedEx (FDX.N), opens new tab Chief Executive Rajesh Subramaniam, the council's board chair, one of the sources briefed on the trip said.
The South China Morning Post first reported the visit on Sunday, saying that executives from firms including Boeing (BA.N), opens new tab would be part of the delegation.
Reuters could not confirm other CEO members of the delegation or which Chinese officials they would meet. Boeing declined to comment on the trip and deferred to USCBC.
The U.S. government was not involved in the organisation of the visit, one of the sources said.
The trip comes as Beijing and Washington work towards a summit between the two countries' leaders later this year, probably around the time of the APEC forum in South Korea October 26 - November 1, sources previously told Reuters.
USCBC did not respond immediately to a request for comment. The business lobby previously organised similar visits to China by American CEO delegations in 2023 and 2024.
The 2024 trip, also led by Subramaniam, included meetings with He and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, where executives discussed issues including market access.
China faces an August 12 deadline to reach a durable deal with the White House or risk higher U.S. tariffs.
U.S. officials are likely to extend the deadline by another 90 days as both sides work towards a more comprehensive deal, sources previously told Reuters.
An extension of that length would prevent further escalation and help create conditions for the potential meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Fury as Trump punishes America's biggest carmaker in friendly fire disaster
Ford builds more cars in America than any other automaker — but instead of reaping the rewards, it's being hit hardest by new trade rules. Detroit-based Ford assembles 80 percent of its US-sold vehicles domestically. But it still relies on imported parts and aluminum — which now face punishing duties. Under new trade deals with Japan, the EU, and South Korea, many imported goods are subject to a 15 percent tariff. That includes cars from Ford's big rivals Toyota, VW and Kia. That rate is far below the 25 percent tariff applied to auto parts and the 50 percent tariff on aluminum introduced this spring. The result is that Ford's American-first strategy is becoming uncompetitive. Ford expects to pay $2.5 billion in tariffs over the next year alone. 'Ford has more reason to complain,' said Bernstein analyst Daniel Roeska. 'If you're now lowering tariffs and letting more cars and content flow into the U.S., that relatively disadvantages Ford more than others.' Ford, which assembles 80 percent of its vehicles in the US, could be negatively impacted by the new trade agreement with Japan - the company doesn't produce any products in the Asian country, and still faces 25 percent tariffs on necessary parts 'I admire Ford,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a recent CNBC interview. Bessent said he hopes to iron out the 'idiosyncratic' burdens that current tariffs are placing on the company by cutting a deal with Canada to address the cost of importing aluminum. Nonetheless the situation as it currently stands is a direct contradiction of what Trump has said he aims to achieve with tariffs. The Presidents has repeatedly claimed he wants to bring back a golden era of Made-In-America manufacturing with the car industry as a cornerstone. US carmakers have welcomed the support after years of struggling to compete with foreign rivals who can take advantage of lower labor costs and less strict regulations. 'For decades now, it has not been a level playing field for U.S. automakers globally, with either tariffs or trade barriers,' General Motors chief executive Mary Barra said earlier this year. 'So I think tariffs is one tool that the administration can use to level the playing field.' However, the tariffs have now made things more difficult and more expensive. Ford President and CEO Jim Farley Ford has been hit hard by import duties on steel, aluminum and car parts Japanese carmakers like Toyota will face a lower tariff rate than American firms because of Trump's latest deal Automakers have been hit by the steel and aluminum tariffs as well as direct duties on auto parts. Furthermore in the previous era of the North American Free Trade Agreement businesses such as GM, Ford and Stellantis invested heavily in manufacturing in Mexico and Canada. Both countries have been swept up in Trump's roiling trade war with temporary tariffs, threats and U-turns causing chaos for entire industries. The storm does not appear to have passed either with Trump last night unexpectedly raising Canada's tariff rate to 35 percent. Mexico's rate currently remains at 25 percent for the next 90 days. The knock-on effect for consumers has been an increase in sticker prices from both domestically made and imported cars.
Auto Blog
31 minutes ago
- Auto Blog
The New Hyundai Elexio Offers More Than Expected for A Reasonable Price
By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. View post: Amazon Is Selling a 'Spacious' $36 Tool Bag for 47% Off, and It 'Can Store Just About Anything' This one's for those who want to know the nitty-gritty of what makes the 2026 Cadillac Lyriq-V worth the extra $12k-$20k. Beyond the F40 and 250 GTO, there's a world of Ferrari to discover. We highlight 5 forgotten Ferrari models that are now surprisingly undervalued and deserve more love. Like every other automaker, Hyundai recognizes that China is an important market. Claiming the vehicle as 'a new starting point,' the company recently revealed the electric Elexio SUV, which has shown impressive capabilities in early safety testing. Hyundai acknowledged that China is a 'must-fight place' for global companies, and the Elexio may help it compete with more established homegrown brands in the country. The automaker is targeting a CLTC driving range of 435 miles (roughly 320 miles using EPA testing) and says the SUV offers fast-charging, advanced technologies, and more. Early crash tests show the new SUV to offer above-average safety, with Hyundai citing its 'God's Hand' high-strength steel plating as a major factor in the tests. It features 360-degree body reinforcements and floor beams for better structural rigidity. Low-temperature battery evaluations found that the Elexio lost less driving range in low-temperature conditions, and it had no trouble operating in ultra-cold conditions. The Elexio is a bit smaller than the Tesla Model Y and will be offered in two configurations, including single- and dual-motor options. The single-motor powertrain offers 214 horsepower, and the dual setup has 312 hp. Both configurations will use LFP batteries from BYD's battery subsidiary, FinDream. Source: Image: Hyundai Hyundai also touted the crossover's ride quality, saying it has 'the highest suspension configuration in its class.' It features advanced dampers and hydraulic bushings, and the automaker said it reworked the suspension system more than 300 times before settling on the configuration. The Elexio is known as the Ioniq 5 of China, so it's unlikely that we'll see it on American streets anytime soon. It's built in China through Hyundai's partnership with BAIC and is expected to have a reasonable starting price of under $20,000. Hyundai plans to launch the vehicle in the third quarter of this year. About the Author Chris Teague View Profile
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
The inside story of the Murdoch editor taking on Donald Trump
The danger posed to Donald Trump was obvious. It was a story that not only drew attention to his links to a convicted sex offender, it also risked widening a growing wedge between the president and some of his most vociferous supporters. The White House quickly concluded a full-force response was required. It was Tuesday 15 July. The Wall Street Journal had approached Trump's team, stating it planned to publish allegations that Trump had composed a crude poem and doodle as part of a collection compiled for Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday. The claim would have been damaging at any moment, but the timing was terrible for the president. The Epstein issue was developing into the biggest crisis of his presidency. Strident Maga supporters had been angered by the Trump administration's refusal to release government files relating to the late sex offender. Trump and his loyal press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, reached for the nuclear option. From Air Force One, they called the Journal's British editor-in-chief, Emma Tucker. They turned up the heat. Trump fumed that the letter was fake. Drawing wasn't his thing. Threats were made to sue, a course of action he had previously unleashed against other perceived media enemies. Washington DC began to hum with rumours that the Journal had a hot story on its hands. When no article materialised on Wednesday, some insiders perceived a growing confidence within the White House that their rearguard action had killed the story. They were wrong. DC's gossip mill had reached fever pitch by Thursday afternoon. The article finally emerged in the early evening. The city collectively stopped to read. In the hours that followed publication, the tension intensified. Trump revealed he had confronted Tucker, stating the story was 'false, malicious, and defamatory'. By Friday, he had filed a lawsuit suing the Journal and its owners for at least $10bn (£7.6bn). Tucker was at the centre of a maelstrom of stress and political pressure. It was the greatest challenge of her two and a half years heading the Journal, but far from the first. Two months in, having been parachuted in from London, she was fronting a campaign to have the reporter Evan Gershkovich returned from a Russian prison. She had also faced denunciations from journalists as she pushed through a modernisation drive that included brutal layoffs. Her plans focused on giving stories a sharper edge. On that metric, the Trump call suggested she was overachieving. Throughout her rise, an enigmatic quality has surrounded Tucker. Friends, colleagues and even some critical employees describe an amiable, fun and disarmingly grounded person. Many regarded her ability to retain such qualities in the treacherous terrain of the Murdoch empire as uncanny. The puzzle is exacerbated by the assumption she does not share the rightwing, pro-Brexit views of Rupert Murdoch, News Corp's legendary mogul. Yet Murdoch doesn't hand the Journal to just anyone. While the pro-Maga Fox News is his empire's cash cow, the Journal is his prized possession, giving him power and respectability in wider US political circles, as the Times does in the UK. So, why Tucker? The answer, according to people who have worked with her, is her possession of two qualities Murdoch rates highly: a willingness to make unpopular decisions for the sake of his businesses and a lust for a politically contentious scoop. Lionel Barber, a former Financial Times editor who also worked with Tucker for the FT in Brussels, said: 'She has a very sharp nose for a good news story – always did.' Tucker edited the University of Oxford's student magazine, the Isis, and joined the FT as a graduate trainee. 'She was a very convivial colleague, great company and good on a night out, but you knew when it came down to the work, she would nail it,' said a colleague. 'Very hard-nosed.' After stints in Brussels and Berlin, she won a powerful ally in Robert Thomson, then the FT's foreign editor. Thomson became a close friend to Murdoch, a fellow Australian, while working in the US for the FT. Thomson jumped ship to edit the Times of London in 2002 and in 2008 was dispatched to New York to oversee Murdoch's freshly acquired Journal. Before he went, Thomson helped lure Tucker to the Times, where she eventually became deputy editor. It was her elevation to editor of the Sunday Times in 2020 that seems to have impressed Murdoch. She showed a willingness to make difficult staffing decisions and widened the Sunday Times's digital ambitions, recasting the pro-Brexit paper to appeal to a wider audience. It was there she made an enemy of her first populist world leader. Just months into her tenure, the Sunday Times published a damning account of how Boris Johnson, the then UK prime minister, had handled the Covid pandemic. Downing Street erupted, taking the unusual step of issuing a lengthy rebuttal, denouncing 'falsehoods and errors'. The paper was called 'the most hostile paper in the country' to Johnson's government, despite having backed him at the previous year's election. Rachel Johnson, the former prime minister's sister, is one of Tucker's closest friends. 'I don't think she was ever reckless,' said one Sunday Times staffer. 'But I think she absolutely wanted to push the boundaries of getting as much into the public domain as she possibly could.' Many assumed Tucker's destiny was to edit the Times, but she was catapulted to New York to run the Journal at the start of 2023, immediately embarking on a painful streamlining process. Senior editors were axed. Pulitzer prize winners ditched. The DC bureau, the most powerful, was particularly targeted with layoffs and new leadership. One reporter spoke of people crying, another of the process's serious mental impact. It made Tucker's editorship divisive, leading to the extraordinary spectacle of journalists plastering her unoccupied office with sticky notes denouncing the layoffs. Even some who accepted cuts questioned the methods. Several pointed to the use of 'performance improvement plans', with journalists claiming they had been handed unrealistic targets designed to push them out the door. One described it as 'gratuitously cruel'. A Journal spokesperson said: 'Performance improvement plans are used to set clear objectives and create a development plan that gives an employee feedback and support to meet those objectives. They are being used exactly as designed.' The Tucker enigma re-emerged at the Journal, as staff noted the same mix of personable demeanour, enthusiasm for stories and willingness to make cuts. 'She's very emotionally intelligent – like, the 99th percentile,' said one. They said morale had improved more recently. New hires have followed. A cultural shift on stories also arrived. What emerges is a Tucker Venn diagram. At its overlapping centre lie stories with two qualities: they cover legitimate areas of public importance and aim squarely at eye-catching topics with digital reach. Tucker gave investigative reporters the examples of Elon Musk and China as two potential areas. Some complained the topics were 'clickbaity'. However, one journalist who had had reservations conceded: 'Musk turned out to be a pretty good topic.' Tucker's use of metrics around web traffic and time spent reading a story irked some reporters. Headlines were made more direct. Honorifics such as 'Mr' and 'Mrs' were ditched. There was a ban on stories having more than three bylines. 'She loosened a lot of the strictures that we had,' said one staffer. 'We're encouraged to write more edgy stories.' Positioning the Journal as a punchy rival to the liberal New York Times juggernaut may be a good business plan, but doing so while not falling foul of Murdoch's politics remains a delicate balance. 'There's a particular moment now where the Wall Street Journal has to prove its mettle as the pre-eminent business and financial markets media organisation,' said Paddy Harverson, a contemporary of Tucker's at the FT, now a communications executive. 'They're up against Trump, yet they have an historically centre-right editorial view. She has guided the paper along that tightrope really well.' Allies said Tucker laid a marker of intent in terms of punchy stories when she published an article on the alleged cognitive decline of Joe Biden. It was initially described as a 'hit piece' by the Biden administration. Some see the Epstein story as the latest evidence of Tucker's shift. There are journalists, however, who blame Trump's response for giving the story attention it simply didn't warrant. Others disagree about the extent of Tucker's changes, pointing to the Journal's history of breaking contentious stories, including the hush money paid to Stormy Daniels. However, the net result of the Epstein letter saga has been to draw attention to Tucker's attempted change in tone. Trump's lawsuit means the furore may only just be beginning. Many seasoned media figures assume Murdoch, who does not respond well to bullying, will not back down. However, neither billionaire will relish having to face depositions and disclosures. Any settlement from Murdoch could put pressure on Tucker, depending on its details. Dow Jones, which publishes the Journal, has said it has 'full confidence in the rigour and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit'. The courts may yet reject Trump's case. 'I don't think [Murdoch] will just flop over,' said Barber. 'The issue here is that Trump went around boasting that he killed the story … For an editor, that's very difficult. But I'm pretty damn confident there's no way [Tucker] would publish without having it properly sourced.'
