U.S., China agree to continue talks on tariff truce extension
Bessent, who led the U.S. delegation with Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, said in Stockholm that he'll brief Trump on Wednesday on the remaining issues.
"There's still a couple of technical details to work out,' Bessent told reporters Tuesday, after two days of meetings with officials from Beijing led by Vice Premier He Lifeng.
After news emerged that China's delegation had indicated a 90-day extension of the two economies' trade-war truce was agreed, Bessent said, "I think our Chinese counterparts have jumped the gun a little.' Asked on CNBC whether he'd recommend that Trump extend the pause, he said he would give Trump the facts, "then he'll decide.'
The Stockholm negotiations marked the third round of U.S.-China trade talks in less than three months. They wrapped up ahead of an Aug. 12 deadline to resolve differences during a 90-day suspension of sky-high tariffs that had threatened to cut off bilateral trade between the world's largest economies. Adding an extra 90 days is one option, Bessent said Tuesday.
Chinese trade negotiator Li Chenggang told reporters that both sides agreed on maintaining the truce, without elaborating on how long. He added that the conversations in the Swedish capital were candid, in-depth and geared for continued close communication.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (L) and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer address a press conference in Rosenbad after the trade talks between the U.S. and China concluded, in Stockholm on Tuesday. |
TT News Agency / via AFP-JIJI
"While there is disappointment that nothing material was agreed, the mood seems to be constructive and optimistic about future potential deals,' Kelvin Lam, senior China economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics in London, said in an initial assessment.
The Stockholm round came on the heels of the Trump administration reaching preliminary tariff deals with Japan and the European Union. Bessent said his Chinese counterparts were in "more of a mood for a wide-ranging discussion.'
Magnet talks
At issue in the ongoing dialog is how the two countries seek to maintain a stable trading relationship while applying barriers like tariffs and export controls to limit each other's progress in critical sectors ranging from battery technology and defense to semiconductors.
Greer said the U.S. wants assurances that critical materials like magnets keep flowing so the two sides can focus on other priorities. "We don't ever want to talk about magnets again,' he said.
Greer said the resumption of China's rare earths exports is Beijing's biggest concession so far. Asked if the U.S. made any commitments to China on its pending 232 investigations, Greer said China asked for status updates on them, but stressed that the eventual duties would be applied globally and not have any exemptions for particular countries.
He also said China asked about the Trump administration's so-called 232 investigations into sectors such as copper, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, and the U.S. explained that those involve global tariffs with no exceptions for individual countries.
Reducing the 20% tariffs that Trump imposed over U.S. claims that Chinese companies supply chemicals used to make the illegal drug fentanyl is also a high priority for Beijing, Eurasia Group analysts wrote in a note last week.
The sticking points in the relationship extend beyond cross-border commerce. Earlier, Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te appeared to call off an overseas trip planned for next week after the Trump administration failed to approve his stopover in the U.S..
Trade tensions have risen recently as both sides try to apply industrial leverage. China has recently exerted its dominance in rare earth minerals for concessions from the U.S. on advanced chips needed for Beijing's ambitions in artificial intelligence.
That softening from U.S. President Donald Trump has worried China hawks in Washington that the administration is giving up too much by easing export controls to strike a deal and hold a summit with President Xi Jinping.
Leaders' meeting
The U.S. president late Monday in Scotland pushed back at such suggestion, posting on social media that he's not pushing for a summit with Xi. "I am not SEEKING anything! I may go to China, but it would only be at the invitation of President Xi, which has been extended. Otherwise, no interest!' Trump wrote.
In the background of the latest trade talks between Washington and Beijing is the race by several economies to sign tariff deals with Trump before Aug. 1, when he's threatening to impose so-called reciprocal import taxes on the U.S.'s major trading partners.
On Sunday, he announced a preliminary deal with the European Union to apply 15% tariffs on EU goods shipped to the U.S..
Speaking Tuesday on CNBC, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick cast many of the issues surrounding the U.S.-EU trade pact as still up for discussion, saying there was "plenty of horse trading left to do.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
11 hours ago
- The Mainichi
From Laos to Brazil, Trump's tariffs leave a lot of losers. But even the winners will pay a price
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Donald Trump's tariff onslaught this week left a lot of losers -- from small, poor countries like Laos and Algeria to wealthy U.S. trading partners like Canada and Switzerland. They're now facing especially hefty taxes -- tariffs -- on the products they export to the United States starting Aug. 7. The closest thing to winners may be the countries that caved to Trump's demands -- and avoided even more pain. But it's unclear whether anyone will be able to claim victory in the long run -- even the United States, the intended beneficiary of Trump's protectionist policies. "In many respects, everybody's a loser here,'' said Barry Appleton, co-director of the Center for International Law at the New York Law School. Barely six months after he returned to the White House, Trump has demolished the old global economic order. Gone is one built on agreed-upon rules. In its place is a system in which Trump himself sets the rules, using America's enormous economic power to punish countries that won't agree to one-sided trade deals and extracting huge concessions from the ones that do. "The biggest winner is Trump," said Alan Wolff, a former U.S. trade official and deputy director-general at the World Trade Organization. "He bet that he could get other countries to the table on the basis of threats, and he succeeded -- dramatically.'' Everything goes back to what Trump calls "Liberation Day'' -- April 2 -- when the president announced "reciprocal'' taxes of up to 50% on imports from countries with which the United States ran trade deficits and 10% "baseline'' taxes on almost everyone else. He invoked a 1977 law to declare the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his sweeping import taxes. That allowed him to bypass Congress, which traditionally has had authority over taxes, including tariffs -- all of which is now being challenged in court. Winners will still pay higher tariffs than before Trump took office Trump retreated temporarily after his Liberation Day announcement triggered a rout in financial markets and suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to give countries a chance to negotiate. Eventually, some of them did, caving to Trump's demands to pay what four months ago would have seemed unthinkably high tariffs for the privilege of continuing to sell into the vast American market. The United Kingdom agreed to 10% tariffs on its exports to the United States -- up from 1.3% before Trump amped up his trade war with the world. The U.S. demanded concessions even though it had run a trade surplus, not a deficit, with the UK for 19 straight years. The European Union and Japan accepted U.S. tariffs of 15%. Those are much higher than the low single-digit rates they paid last year -- but lower than the tariffs he was threatening (30% on the EU and 25% on Japan). Also cutting deals with Trump and agreeing to hefty tariffs were Pakistan, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines. Even countries that saw their tariffs lowered from April without reaching a deal are still paying much higher tariffs than before Trump took office. Angola's tariff, for instance, dropped to 15% from 32% in April, but in 2022 it was less than 1.5%. And while Trump administration cut Taiwan's tariff to 20% from 32% in April, the pain will still be felt. "20% from the beginning has not been our goal, we hope that in further negotiations we will get a more beneficial and more reasonable tax rate," Taiwan's president Lai Ching-te told reporters in Taipei Friday. Trump also agreed to reduce the tariff on the tiny southern African kingdom of Lesotho to 15% from the 50% he'd announced in April, but the damage may already have been done there. Bashing Brazil, clobbering Canada, shellacking the Swiss Countries that didn't knuckle under -- and those that found other ways to incur Trump's wrath -- got hit harder. Even some poorer countries were not spared. Laos' annual economic output comes to $2,100 per person and Algeria's $5,600 -- versus America's $75,000. Nonetheless, Laos got rocked with a 40% tariff and Algeria with a 30% levy. Trump slammed Brazil with a 50% import tax largely because he didn't like the way it was treating former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is facing trial for trying to lose his electoral defeat in 2022. Never mind that the U.S. has exported more to Brazil than it's imported every year since 2007. Trump's decision to plaster a 35% tariff on longstanding U.S. ally Canada was partly designed to threaten Ottawa for saying it would recognize a Palestinian state. Trump is a staunch supporter of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Switzerland was clobbered with a 39% import tax -- even higher than the 31% Trump originally announced on April 2. "The Swiss probably wish that they had camped in Washington'' to make a deal, said Wolff, now senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "They're clearly not at all happy.'' Fortunes may change if Trump's tariffs are upended in court. Five American businesses and 12 states are suing the president, arguing that his Liberation Day tariffs exceeded his authority under the 1977 law. In May, the U.S. Court of International Trade, a specialized court in New York, agreed and blocked the tariffs, although the government was allowed to continue collecting them while its appeal wend its way through the legal system, and may likely end up at the U.S. Supreme Court. In a hearing Thursday, the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sounded skeptical about Trump's justifications for the tariffs. "If (the tariffs) get struck down, then maybe Brazil's a winner and not a loser,'' Appleton said. Paying more for knapsacks and video games Trump portrays his tariffs as a tax on foreign countries. But they are actually paid by import companies in the U.S. who try to pass along the cost to their customers via higher prices. True, tariffs can hurt other countries by forcing their exporters to cut prices and sacrifice profits -- or risk losing market share in the United States. But economists at Goldman Sachs estimate that overseas exporters have absorbed just one-fifth of the rising costs from tariffs, while Americans and U.S. businesses have picked up the most of the tab. Walmart, Procter & Gamble, Ford, Best Buy, Adidas, Nike, Mattel and Stanley Black & Decker, have all hiked prices due to U.S. tariffs "This is a consumption tax, so it disproportionately affects those who have lower incomes,'' Appleton said. "Sneakers, knapsacks ... your appliances are going to go up. Your TV and electronics are going to go up. Your video game devices, consoles are going to up because none of those are made in America.'' Trump's trade war has pushed the average U.S. tariff from 2.5% at the start of 2025 to 18.3% now, the highest since 1934, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University. And that will impose a $2,400 cost on the average household, the lab estimates. "The U.S. consumer's a big loser," Wolff said.
Nikkei Asia
11 hours ago
- Nikkei Asia
China and Russia collaborate in global spread of surveillance states
Comment Political meddling in Georgia shows threat of growing authoritarian coordination Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and Chinese President Xi Jinping are working to expand their countries' influence in Georgia, a crucial South Caucasus link between Asia and Europe. (Nikkei montage/Source photos by Reuters) HIROYUKI AKITA TBILISI, Georgia -- It was a rare instance of a senior Chinese official speaking with unusual candor: On July 2, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told European Union top diplomat Kaja Kallas that he does not want to see Russia lose the war in Ukraine.
Japan Times
11 hours ago
- Japan Times
Trump's economic agenda is losing support, but Democrats see few gains
U.S. voters are increasingly souring on President Donald Trump's handling of the economy, according to a raft of new polling, but that disapproval still isn't translating into a political windfall for Democrats. Just 37% of voters approve of Trump's approach to the economy as of July, according to Gallup polling, down from 42% in February 2025. While Republicans still strongly back the president, the bulk of the drop comes from falling support among independents — less than a third of whom now think he's doing a good job. This new polling from Gallup, plus similar findings from the Wall Street Journal, CBS News and others, highlights the potential warning signs for both political parties heading into the 2026 midterms. For Trump, an economy he has openly celebrated is flashing warning signs, including in hiring data. A slower-than-expected jobs report Friday sparked a furious backlash from the president, who questioned without evidence whether the numbers had been politically manipulated and fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Democrats looking to retake the House of Representatives need to convince voters they can be trusted on issues like fighting inflation, bringing down the cost of housing and creating new jobs for the working class — messages Democrats failed to adequately convey during the 2024 presidential election. Yet even while voters express some skepticism of Trump's agenda on both questions, a recent Wall Street Journal poll showed they trust Republicans more than Democrats to tackle both inflation and tariffs — even though Republicans in Congress have nearly unanimously voted to back the president's policies. The same poll showed 63% of voters hold an unfavorable view of Democrats overall — double the amount (30%) who hold a favorable view. "Trump's support on the economy is eroding, but Democrats are not gaining in kind,' said Lanae Erickson, senior vice president for social policy, education and politics at Third Way. "Even on things Trump is underwater on, like tariffs, voters are blaming Trump but not Republicans broadly.' Republicans have their own set of challenges, as they too plan to center their midterm message on the state of the economy. Trump likes to talk about the way America has entered a so-called golden age, pointing to stock market gains, but data show a more mixed picture of the overall economy. While layoffs remain low, hiring has slowed. Employment growth has averaged just 35,000 jobs in the past three months, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the worst since the pandemic. Friday's jobs report — which preceded Trump's social media outburst — showed payrolls up 73,000 in July while the prior two months were downgraded by nearly 260,000. What's more, tariffs threaten to raise consumer prices, even if the impact has been limited so far, and company earnings are expected to clock in a lowest amount in the last two years. "Running an inflationary trade war is probably not smart politics,' said Michael Strain, director of Economic Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute. "It's a big gamble that the trade war won't result in inflation.' Trump's signature legislative accomplishment, the sweeping tax, budget and health care law he calls the "One Big, Beautiful Bill,' also remains unpopular with a huge swath of voters. Some 46% of adults say the tax legislation will hurt their families, while 28% do not expect to be affected, according to polling from the Kaiser Family Foundation. That's a problem the party will need to overcome, if it's meant to serve as a cornerstone of its accomplishments in Trump's first year. It also echoes a problem Democrats never found a way to solve with former President Joe Biden's signature bills, an infrastructure package and a climate and tax law that were largely ignored by voters in 2022, when Republicans narrowly won control of the House. Barack Obama's signature legislation, the Obamacare health care law, became so politically toxic that it helped Republicans sweep to a more than 60-seat gain in the 2010 House elections in what became known as the Tea Party wave on promises to repeal it. The law, which recovered in political popularity over subsequent years as its effects began to take hold, has mostly survived. To hold onto the House, Republicans will need the support of independents and non-MAGA Republicans. Trump's support appears to be softening with both groups. A recent Gallup poll showed some movement toward Democrats as Trump began implementing his economic agenda. By a narrow margin — 46% to 43% — voters said they leaned more toward the Democratic Party than the Republican Party in the second quarter of 2025. That's a reversal from the last quarter before Trump took office, when Democrats trailed Republicans by a nearly identical margin, 43%-47%. Democrats say they plan to capitalize on voters' uneven view of the economy, by building their midterm message on the issue of affordability. "Folks are struggling to limit the cost of housing, food, child care, health care, energy costs — and that was the big promise Republicans made, that they were going to lower costs on Day 1. They are absolutely not focused on that at all,' said Rep. Suzan DelBene, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee at a recent gathering with reporters. "Their focus is on helping the wealthiest and well-connected.' That focus would be a change from 2024, when the party was torn on whether to emphasize an economic message, or to talk about the threat they believed Trump posed to democracy. Kamala Harris toggled between the two ideas during the final sprint of her campaign. Yet Trump's signature style is to move so fast and on so many fronts, from immigration to foreign policy, that Democrats have struggled to stay on an economic message. Issues like Israel and Gaza have exposed rifts among Democrats that Republicans, largely united behind the president, are eager to exploit. In recent days, Democrats have also seized on stories about Trump's connections to the late disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, sensing a vulnerability for the president's party on that story among independent voters. Historically, Republicans have held the advantage on being the party most trusted to handle the economy and that's something Democrats will have to try to overcome in both the midterms and in the 2028 presidential race. When Trump lost in 2020 and Biden prevailed, political pundits attributed those election results to the aftermath of the once-in-a-century pandemic — not any increased confidence in Democrats' ability to manage the economy. Trump — who, at one point, had suggested Americans could inject bleach into their bodies to fight COVID-19 — had lost voters' trust to handle a massive health care crisis that had upended American life. Then, once he was in office, Biden lost trust. The return to normalcy and stable leadership promised by his campaign collapsed in the messy U.S. exit from Afghanistan, and his approval ratings never recovered. Americans broadly didn't buy the idea that the economy was in good shape overall, and weren't swayed when he and his aides tried to convince Americans that soaring post-COVID inflation was only temporary. "The American people rendered a pretty clear judgment,' AEI's Strain said, speaking about one of the challenges Democrats face for the midterms. "They held President Biden responsible for the inflation we experienced in 2021 and 2022 and that is still fresh in people's mind.'
