&w=3840&q=100)
US-China trade talks stalled, businesses wait for Trump and Xi to intervene
Since the mid-May agreement, the Trump administration has shifted focus toward negotiating tariffs with other major trading partners including India Japan, and the European Union. Last week, Trump threatened to impose 50% tariffs on EU products but later postponed the move. read more
US President Donald Trump hailed a "total reset" in US-China trade relations, ahead of a second day of talks Sunday between top officials from Washington and Beijing aimed at de-escalating trade tensions sparked by his aggressive tariff rollout. File Image / Reuters
Trade discussions between the United States and China have reached a standstill, and moving forward may now depend on direct engagement between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Speaking with Fox News, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Thursday that progress has slowed since the breakthrough talks he led two weeks ago, which resulted in a temporary halt to escalating tariffs between the two economic giants. Despite the slowdown, he expressed hope that more negotiations would resume in the coming weeks.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'I think there's a chance we'll see a call between President Trump and Chairman Xi at some point,' Bessent said.
Highlighting the complexity and scale of the issues at hand, he added, 'This process is likely to require both leaders stepping in. They have a strong rapport, and I'm confident that China will engage once President Trump signals his direction.'
The temporary truce, which paused triple-digit tariffs for 90 days, sparked a surge in global markets. However, the underlying concerns that led to the tariffs—particularly U.S. grievances over China's state-controlled, export-centric economic practices—remain unresolved and are expected to be tackled in future discussions.
Since the mid-May agreement, the Trump administration has shifted focus toward negotiating tariffs with other major trading partners including India Japan, and the European Union. Last week, Trump threatened to impose 50% tariffs on EU products but later postponed the move.
Meanwhile, a U.S. trade court ruled on Wednesday that Trump exceeded his authority when applying most of the tariffs on Chinese and other foreign imports using emergency powers. However, a federal appeals court reversed that ruling the following day, placing a temporary hold while it reviews the government's appeal. The court directed the plaintiffs to respond by June 5, with the administration's reply due by June 9.
Despite the legal uncertainties, Bessent noted that countries like Japan remain committed to negotiations. He reported no shift in their negotiating positions following the court developments and confirmed plans to meet with a Japanese delegation in Washington on Friday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
41 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Why we go bonkers for fancy brands – even when it makes no sense
Juliet's famous lament - 'What's in a name?' - questioning the value placed on names and lineage, found new relevance recently. Social media posts from Chinese manufacturers showcasing the production of high-end luxury goods in their factories - and urging consumers to buy directly from them, although without the brand label - once again highlighted the powerful psychological grip brands hold over us. Perceived value has been alluring to humans for as long as the species has existed. Things are coveted for the single and simple reason that they are coveted by others. Possession of such items gives one pleasure because of the thought that others now think they have reached some standing. Earlier, this covetousness was limited to precious metals and stones. This has now extended to brands. The dictionary defines a brand as 'a type of product made by a particular company and sold under a particular name'. This simple definition, however, only encapsulates the making and the selling - it does not touch the psychological dimension of emotions that a 'brand' generates for the brand's owners, and for those who want to be owners. For example, a wristwatch is not an object needed to tell time anymore. It is used to signal that one has arrived. If one brand signals status, then two must signal a higher one? Except if they are on the same product. I recently came across a real example. I saw a Maruti Omni mini-van sporting a Toyota logo - quite a jarring sight. It took me back to my school days in Pune, where on a 'Chor Bazaar' street in the cantonment area, you could find shoes bearing a Nike logo on one side and Adidas on the other. Now imagine a BMW with Jaguar's leaping cat gracing the hood, or a Louis Vuitton bag adorned with Chanel's interlocked area where dual brands don't cause cognitive confusion is academia. There are joint programmes offered by universities, and one can imagine a certificate with the logo of two universities. In fact, a degree that has the logo of two high-ranking colleges would be highly sought after. A similar psychological reaction is expected to an endorsement from multiple companies - say, as part of a joint training programme, especially if the entrance criteria are multiple brands don't make sense when they are on the same manufactured product. But they are coveted when they signal learning, or acquisition of complex calculus underlies our interaction with brands. An alien species studying human choices would reach these conclusions for our decision-making rules related to brands:1. Covet what others have and want.2. There's no constraint on items that can be pursued. Only rule 1 should be satisfied. These can be anything from tulip bulbs to colours on paper.3. Sometimes, one's own needs are superseded by Rule #2. 4. Show it off once it is acquired.5. Protect the label more than the product. The item loses its value if the label gets damaged - even if the product is functioning at full efficiency.6. One brand is good, two are super - but not in all instances (see above).6. Sometimes, ownership is not the goal. Acquire now to sell later at a higher value.7. Sometimes, showing off is not the goal. A concealed display is required to protect it. Just knowledge within the community that one owns it, is satisfying.8. Even though brand and label acquisition signals wealth, a direct demonstration of wealth -- such as displaying one's net worth -- is aliens might have to scratch their heads to make a logical framework that accommodates these behaviours. Even if they managed this task, they would be dumbstruck by learning what we think differentiates us from other species - that we consider ourselves rational. The writer is MD, Resonance Laboratories, Bengaluru (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. What's slowing Indian IT's AI deals? The answer is hidden in just two words. Jolt to Çelebi could turn a big gain for this Indian firm that once had deep Turkish ties Nestlé India's outgoing CEO Narayanan weathered the Maggi storm; Tiwary must tackle slowing growth Uncle Sam vs. Microsoft: Which is a safer bet to park money? ONGC squandered its future once. Can it be different this time? Will revised economic capital framework lead to higher RBI dividend to govt? These large- and mid-cap stocks can give more than 30% return in 1 year, according to analysts Buy, Sell or Hold: Emkay Global upgrades SAIL to buy; YES Securities sees 13% upside in VA Tech Wabag Railways stocks: Time to be contrarian; will bearish analysts go wrong again? 6 stocks, 2 with buy recos, 4 with sell recos
Time of India
41 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bablu's Phuchka Model: Global supply chain, local love story
With my fondness for Nirvana, German Expressionism, and Guinness, it may come as a surprise that I'm a vocalist for local. There's a certain kind of happiness I feel when I buy chicken, go out to have phuchka , get a haircut, or buy medicine from my course, the chicken is probably of distant (read: non-neighbourhood) provenance. The barber uses tools, creams, and lotions made in different parts of India (the fan in his saloon is China-made). Barring the potatoes and chillies in Bablu's perfect phuchka cocktail being locally sourced (our area is urban-agricultural), the atta, tamarind and everything else are most likely from 'outside'. And my stash of Met XL50 that I get from the local med store is manufactured in Guwahati by a company headquartered in Kandivili each contribution of dosh to my immediate 'desh' - my locals for whom I harbour a disproportionate amount of material and metaphysical loyalty - is part of a larger, great chain of economic being. Of course, it would have been grand if my neighbourhood manufactured printers, made EV batteries, had bookstores that I would gladly have I'm not a postcolonial nutter who thinks manufacturing GPUs is one hop away from spinning khadi. Truth be told, my Swadeshi Lite is firmly based on availability, ease of procuring, and quality, with the hope to see my neighbourhood grow more prosperous by the main difference - heck, the only difference - between Trump's call for a swadeshi andolan and Modi's shout-out to Make India Great Again is in their nuance. The former, French farmers' union style, doesn't want anything that is consumed by the American people to be produced outside America. The latter, Bapu-style, doesn't want the Indian people to consume anything that is produced outside India. It's a subtle difference, but a telling both versions - 'make what you consume' vs 'consume (only) what you make' - the real intention is to see that the Country-That-Must-Not-Be-Named is denied two of its biggest markets. If all goes well, the Country-That-Must-Not-Be-Named will shrivel to the size of an economic shih tzu, while America returns to its rightful place in the comity of nations that it had in the 1950s-1960s, and India goes back to its own hallowed position from which it was displaced before the very moment Babur crossed the Chenab in a self-sustaining economy should not be a problem for a country that makes everything it uses. For a country that doesn't have much use for jet skis, like, say, landlocked Vatican City, not having a homegrown jet ski-manufacturing industry isn't a problem. Unless, for some sentimental reason, the new pope decides to start exporting jet skis to Peru and/or problem is that the Country-That-Must-Not-Be-Named has, over the years, infiltrated their merchandise everywhere in almost everything. And we're not just talking about Ganesh idols that Kiren Rijiju may have bought online by mistake. We're talking about also infiltrating things that go into making things that make all this gung-ho hungama about ' Make in India ', everyone is thinking only quantitatively. This may be understandable for a country that takes (perverse) pride in having more people than any other country - 'Kya hai tumhare paas? 'Mere paas demographic dividend hai!' But quality has a quantity of its own that goes beyond shifting units Soviet Union ball a reason why after the swadeshi movement did what it had set out to do, we didn't quite become a nation of charkha spinners. Tagore was bang on in his 1925 essay, 'The Cult of the Charkha': 'I am afraid of a blind faith on a very large scale in the charkha in the country, which is so liable to succumb to the lure of short-cuts when pointed out by a personality about whose moral earnestness they can have no doubt.'Instead, we invested in the tech descendants of the spinning jenny, despite its Lancashire 'satanic mills' origins. If we do get seriously vocal for local - and I think it's a splendid idea - we mustn't fall for any cult. Instead, invest monetarily and imaginatively in making things that will make us want to buy if Bablu's phuchkas were Chinese, you think people wouldn't have lined up to gobble them? They're just 'world-class', you see.
Economic Times
41 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Bablu's Phuchka Model: Global supply chain, local love story
With my fondness for Nirvana, German Expressionism, and Guinness, it may come as a surprise that I'm a vocalist for local. There's a certain kind of happiness I feel when I buy chicken, go out to have phuchka, get a haircut, or buy medicine from my neighbourhood. Of course, the chicken is probably of distant (read: non-neighbourhood) provenance. The barber uses tools, creams, and lotions made in different parts of India (the fan in his saloon is China-made). Barring the potatoes and chillies in Bablu's perfect phuchka cocktail being locally sourced (our area is urban-agricultural), the atta, tamarind and everything else are most likely from 'outside'. And my stash of Met XL50 that I get from the local med store is manufactured in Guwahati by a company headquartered in Kandivili West. So, each contribution of dosh to my immediate 'desh' - my locals for whom I harbour a disproportionate amount of material and metaphysical loyalty - is part of a larger, great chain of economic being. Of course, it would have been grand if my neighbourhood manufactured printers, made EV batteries, had bookstores that I would gladly have visited... But I'm not a postcolonial nutter who thinks manufacturing GPUs is one hop away from spinning khadi. Truth be told, my Swadeshi Lite is firmly based on availability, ease of procuring, and quality, with the hope to see my neighbourhood grow more prosperous by the day. The main difference - heck, the only difference - between Trump's call for a swadeshi andolan and Modi's shout-out to Make India Great Again is in their nuance. The former, French farmers' union style, doesn't want anything that is consumed by the American people to be produced outside America. The latter, Bapu-style, doesn't want the Indian people to consume anything that is produced outside India. It's a subtle difference, but a telling one. In both versions - 'make what you consume' vs 'consume (only) what you make' - the real intention is to see that the Country-That-Must-Not-Be-Named is denied two of its biggest markets. If all goes well, the Country-That-Must-Not-Be-Named will shrivel to the size of an economic shih tzu, while America returns to its rightful place in the comity of nations that it had in the 1950s-1960s, and India goes back to its own hallowed position from which it was displaced before the very moment Babur crossed the Chenab in 1519. Being a self-sustaining economy should not be a problem for a country that makes everything it uses. For a country that doesn't have much use for jet skis, like, say, landlocked Vatican City, not having a homegrown jet ski-manufacturing industry isn't a problem. Unless, for some sentimental reason, the new pope decides to start exporting jet skis to Peru and/or America. The problem is that the Country-That-Must-Not-Be-Named has, over the years, infiltrated their merchandise everywhere in almost everything. And we're not just talking about Ganesh idols that Kiren Rijiju may have bought online by mistake. We're talking about also infiltrating things that go into making things that make things. In all this gung-ho hungama about 'Make in India', everyone is thinking only quantitatively. This may be understandable for a country that takes (perverse) pride in having more people than any other country - 'Kya hai tumhare paas? 'Mere paas demographic dividend hai!' But quality has a quantity of its own that goes beyond shifting units Soviet Union ball bearing-style. There's a reason why after the swadeshi movement did what it had set out to do, we didn't quite become a nation of charkha spinners. Tagore was bang on in his 1925 essay, 'The Cult of the Charkha': 'I am afraid of a blind faith on a very large scale in the charkha in the country, which is so liable to succumb to the lure of short-cuts when pointed out by a personality about whose moral earnestness they can have no doubt.' Instead, we invested in the tech descendants of the spinning jenny, despite its Lancashire 'satanic mills' origins. If we do get seriously vocal for local - and I think it's a splendid idea - we mustn't fall for any cult. Instead, invest monetarily and imaginatively in making things that will make us want to buy them. Frankly, if Bablu's phuchkas were Chinese, you think people wouldn't have lined up to gobble them? They're just 'world-class', you see. Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. What's slowing Indian IT's AI deals? The answer is hidden in just two words. Jolt to Çelebi could turn a big gain for this Indian firm that once had deep Turkish ties Nestlé India's outgoing CEO Narayanan weathered the Maggi storm; Tiwary must tackle slowing growth Uncle Sam vs. Microsoft: Which is a safer bet to park money? ONGC squandered its future once. Can it be different this time? Will revised economic capital framework lead to higher RBI dividend to govt? These large- and mid-cap stocks can give more than 30% return in 1 year, according to analysts Buy, Sell or Hold: Emkay Global upgrades SAIL to buy; YES Securities sees 13% upside in VA Tech Wabag Railways stocks: Time to be contrarian; will bearish analysts go wrong again? 6 stocks, 2 with buy recos, 4 with sell recos
