China's strategy forces US to shut down 28..., Washington accuses Beijing of...
New Delhi: The United States has issued a stern warning regarding China's trade practices. This warning concerns China's policies in the textile and apparel sector. The U.S. claims that China is adopting non-market policies, which are detrimental to the United States. The United States Trade Representative (USTR) has stated that pressure on American products is increasing. In the past 22 months, 28 manufacturing plants have closed in the U.S. In 2024, the U.S. imported $79.3 billion worth of clothing, of which 21% came from China. The U.S. wants China to comply with trade rules.
The USTR has shared a post on the social media platform X. It states, 'On the occasion of National Textile Day, USTR condemns unfair trade practices that undermine the U.S. textile and apparel sector.'
In a post, the USTR stated that China's non-market policies give its domestic manufacturers an unfair competitive advantage. As a result, they are able to charge artificially low prices for their products. The USTR has alleged that these policies of China have had a negative impact on American textile and apparel manufacturers. In the last 22 months, 28 American plants have shut down.
In another post, the USTR wrote that the U.S. imported $79.3 billion worth of clothing in 2024, of which 21% came from China. Chinese e-commerce companies accounted for over 30% of all daily de minimis shipments in the U.S. The post states, 'They are flooding our market with cheap clothing while circumventing tariffs and trade enforcement mechanisms. Cheap clothing has devastated local industries.' How much did China export?
According to USTR, in the year 2024, the total merchandise trade between the United States and China was about 582.4 billion dollars. In 2024, the export of American goods to China was 143.5 billion dollars. This is 2.9% (4.2 billion dollars) less than in 2023. In 2024, the import of American goods from China was 438.9 billion dollars. This is 2.8% (12.1 billion dollars) more than in 2023. In 2024, the trade deficit with China for the United States was 295.4 billion dollars. This is 5.8% (16.3 billion dollars) more than in 2023. This means that the United States is buying more goods from China and selling less. This is causing losses for the United States in trade.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
27 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump says China trade deal ‘done': 55% tariff, supply of rare earth minerals
President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the United States has reached a trade agreement with China, including an easing of curbs imposed by Beijing on export of rare earth minerals and magnets that are key inputs for industries ranging from automobiles to electronics. 'Our deal with China is done, subject to final approval with President Xi and me,' Trump said in a post on Truth Social. He said China would supply 'any necessary rare earths' and magnets, while the US would make concessions on allowing Chinese students to attend American universities. The Trump administration had recently begun to clamp down on the presence of Chinese nationals on US college campuses. 'We are getting a total of 55% tariffs, China is getting 10%. Relationship is excellent!' Trump wrote, without elaborating. Bloomberg quoted a White House official as saying that the agreement allows the US to charge a 55 per cent tariff on imported Chinese goods, which, crucially, includes a 10 per cent baseline 'reciprocal' tariff, a 20 per cent tariff for fentanyl trafficking, and a 25 per cent tariff reflecting pre-existing tariffs (imposed by Trump in his first term, that the Biden administration persisted with). China would charge a 10 per cent tariff on American imports, the official said. Though the details of the deal were still unclear, analysts predicted that China seems to have gained the upper-hand after its rare earth restrictions prompted US carmakers, including Ford Motor and Chrysler, to cut production. Significantly, Trump said a final deal is subject to approval from him and Chinese President Xi Jinping. Chinese state media said earlier Wednesday that Beijing had reached a 'framework' for an agreement with the US during talks in London, but there was no official response from China on Trump's subsequent claims on Truth Social. Earlier, both the negotiating sides said they had agreed in principle to a framework for dialling down trade tensions between the world's two biggest economies. After the meeting in London — the second time the two sides have met in the last couple of months, since Trump's sweeping tariff onslaught — there were indications of a reconciliation. What is beginning to get clearer after the second meeting is that this is perhaps not how the US imagined the trade war to unfold. China is beginning to dictate the direction of the bilateral talks, with the US almost seen as requesting for much-needed concessions on the resumption of supplies of critical inputs. In the first round of talks in Geneva, the US delegation led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had asked the Chinese to cut its tariffs in tandem with theirs, primarily because the Americans were facing the heat back home from the early fallout of the high tariffs, including empty shelves at grocery stories and surging prices of daily use commodities. In London, the US side is learnt to have specifically asked the Chinese to 'suspend or remove' restrictions on rare earths magnets, which had forced a supply-chain crunch. The London meeting follows a call between Trump and Xi on June 5, which was initiated by the White House — the first call since Trump's reciprocal tariff announcement. After the London talks, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the deal should result in restrictions on rare earth minerals and magnets 'being resolved'. 'We have reached a framework to implement the Geneva consensus… Once the Presidents approve it, we will then seek to implement it,' he said. 'The two sides have, in principle, reached a framework for implementing the consensus reached by the two heads of state during the phone call on June 5 and the consensus reached at the Geneva meeting,' the BBC quoted China's Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang as saying. Chinese export controls over rare earth minerals were high on the agenda of the meetings. While Beijing has not imposed an outright ban on the export of rare earth magnets, the process has been made very difficult; it could take a long time to source, posing shortage risks. Rare earth magnets, especially neodymium-iron-boron (NdFeB) magnets, are crucial for EV manufacturing. They provide the strong magnetic fields needed for efficient and powerful electric motors, including traction motors that drive EVs. These magnets also play a major role in other EV components like power steering systems, wiper motors and braking systems. China has a virtual stranglehold over these rare earth magnets. In May, talks held in Geneva led to a temporary truce after the tit-for-tat tariff increases by both sides, which led to duties that peaked at 145 per cent. Trump called the outcome of the talks in Switzerland a 'total reset', which brought US tariffs on Chinese products down to 30 per cent, while Beijing cut duties on US imports to 10 per cent. Both sides also agreed to a 90-day deadline to try to reach a trade deal. However, the US and China have since accused each other of breaching the deal. The US has said that Beijing has been dragging its feet on opening up exports of rare earth metals and magnets while the Chinese claim that Washington has restricted its access to American goods such as semiconductors and other related technologies linked to artificial intelligence. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer had said China had failed to roll back restrictions on exports of rare earth magnets. In the run-up to this week's talks, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said on Saturday that it had approved some applications for rare earth export licences. The problem for the US is that the Chinese side has wrested some advantage, especially by leveraging its strategy of weaponing its dominance in key sectors. Rare earth minerals and magnets is one such area, where the US is now desperate for concessions. Both sides have since claimed breaches on non-tariff pledges, but the Americans clearly seem more eager for a reconciliation, given the impact of the Chinese blockade on its key manufacturing sectors. These Chinese trade blockades are already impacting companies in other geographies. Hamamatsu-based small car maker Suzuki Motors, for instance, said last week it plans to suspend the production of its flagship Swift compact hatchback due to China's rare earth restrictions, becoming the first Japanese automaker to be impacted. There are similar worries among other manufacturing entities across the world, including in the US. Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
India.com
39 minutes ago
- India.com
India Won Operation Sindoor – But What Does The Army Want Next, And Who Poses The Greatest Threat?
New Delhi: India crushed Pakistan's assault during Operation Sindoor. But after the dust settled, something more alarming came into view. China was not sitting on the sidelines. It was pulling strings from behind the curtain. Indian radars picked up Chinese-made jets in Pakistani skies. Chinese missiles were used to target Indian bases. Beijing was deeply involved. That means India was not fighting just Pakistan. India was up against two enemies at once. Military officers have sounded the alarm. They want India's defence budget raised to 2.5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Right now, the defence allocation stands at just 1.9%. A huge portion of that money goes into salaries and pensions. Only a quarter of it helps modernise the military. This cannot continue. Not when two hostile neighbours are preparing for something bigger. China has been pumping weapons into Pakistan. In the May 7-10 clashes, Pakistan deployed Chinese J-10 jets and HQ-9 missile systems. Beijing has promised to send more – stealth fighters, long-range air defence weapons and new-generation drones. China is flooding Pakistan with cutting-edge military tools. Pakistan's economy is in crisis. But even then, Islamabad raised its defence budget by 20%. It cut development. It ignored debt. It focused on weapons. India must respond, believe experts, arguing that it is time for total self-reliance in defence production. India must build fighter jets, drones, loitering munitions and missiles on its own. The private sector must step in. Half-measures will not do. Half-prepared armies lose wars. India's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) project has started moving. But it must move faster. Tejas took decades. The same mistake cannot happen again. The Indian Air Force is short on fighter squadrons. It has just 30. The target is 42.5. Drones are the new face of war. Swarm drones. FPV kamikaze drones. Loitering drones. India needs all of these, and it needs them in bulk. No country will come to India's rescue in a full-scale war. India must stand on its own. During Operation Sindoor, India used Russian S-400s, Israeli Barak-8s and its own Akash missiles. These systems intercepted and neautralised many Pakistani drone and missile attacks. But more layers are needed. DRDO must now accelerate two things – short-range air defence systems and long-range strike missiles like Project Kusha. Military reform is also crucial. India has a huge army. It must cut unnecessary spending. It must remove red tape from weapons procurement. And it must create joint theatre commands that allow the Army, Navy and Air Force to fight as one. A senior military commander put it bluntly. India is now staring at a superpower that is feeding a hostile neighbour. Pakistan may fire the bullets. But China is loading the gun. India cannot look away anymore. The next battle may not wait for long.
Hindustan Times
43 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
US orders departure of non-essential personnel in Middle East as tensions rise
The United States is drawing down the presence of people who are not deemed essential to operations in the Middle East due to the potential for regional unrest, the State Department and military said Wednesday. The State Department said it has ordered the departure of all nonessential personnel from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad based on its latest review and a commitment 'to keeping Americans safe, both at home and abroad.' The embassy already had been on limited staffing, and the order will not affect a large number of personnel. The department, however, also is authorizing the departure of nonessential personnel and family members from Bahrain and Kuwait. That gives them an option on whether to leave those countries. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also 'has authorized the voluntary departure of military dependents from locations' across the region, U.S. Central Command said in a statement. The command 'is monitoring the developing tension in the Middle East.' White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly confirmed the moves. 'The State Department regularly reviews American personnel abroad, and this decision was made as a result of a recent review,' Kelly said. Tensions in the region have been rising in recent days as talks between the U.S. and Iran over its rapidly advancing nuclear program appear to have hit an impasse. The talks seek to limit Iran's nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of some of the crushing economic sanctions that the U.S. has imposed on the Islamic Republic. Iran insists its nuclear program is peaceful. Also Read: Donald Trump wearing a Foley catheter? POTUS' latest appearance sparks health concerns The next round of talks — the sixth — had been tentatively scheduled for this weekend in Oman, according to two U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss diplomatic matters. However, those officials said Wednesday that it looked increasingly unlikely that the talks would happen. President Donald Trump, who has previously threatened to use military force against Iran if negotiations failed, gave a less-than-optimistic view about reaching a deal with Iran, telling the New York Post's 'Pod Force One' podcast that he was "getting more and more less confident about' a deal. Also Read: Trump says he would 'certainly invoke' Insurrection Act if needed amid Los Angeles protests 'They seem to be delaying, and I think that's a shame. I'm less confident now than I would have been a couple of months ago. Something happened to them," he said in the interview, which was recorded on Monday. Also Read: Donald Trump accepts Elon Musk's apology: 'Very nice that he did that' Iran's mission to the U.N. posted on social media that 'threats of overwhelming force won't change the facts.' 'Iran is not seeking a nuclear weapon, and U.S. militarism only fuels instability,' the Iranian mission wrote. Iranian Defense Minister Gen. Aziz Nasirzadeh separately told journalists Wednesday that he hoped talks with the U.S. would yield results, though Tehran stood ready to respond. 'If conflict is imposed on us, the opponent's casualties will certainly be more than ours, and in that case, America must leave the region, because all its bases are within our reach,' he said. 'We have access to them, and we will target all of them in the host countries without hesitation.' Meanwhile, the Board of Governors at the International Atomic Energy Agency was potentially set to vote on a measure to censure Iran. That could set in motion an effort to snap back United Nations sanctions on Iran via a measure in Tehran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers that's still active until October. Trump withdrew from that deal in his first term. Earlier Wednesday, a statement from the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center, a Mideast-based effort overseen by the British navy, issued a warning to ships in the region that it 'has been made aware of increased tensions within the region which could lead to an escalation of military activity having a direct impact on mariners.' It urged caution in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman and the Strait of Hormuz. It did not name Iran, though those waterways have seen Iranian ship seizures and attacks in the past.
