logo
Trump's tariff card against China

Trump's tariff card against China

Express Tribune26-01-2025

Listen to article
KARACHI:
US President Donald Trump has announced that a new 10% across-the-board tariff on Chinese goods could be imposed as soon as February 1. If he follows through on his threat, what will cost the Americans more?
Unlike Mexico and Canada, which largely avoid tariffs on exports to the United States because of the USMCA (the United States-Mexico-Canada) trade agreement which Trump signed in his first term, a wide array of Chinese goods currently face tariffs. The high tariff strategy may do harm to America and not spur growth of the manufacturing industry, while making the world poorer and the US as well.
The Economist reported that more than 90 years ago, America's 32nd and longest serving president Franklin Delano Roosevelt surveyed the wreckage of the Great Depression. He pointed to one of its causes: sky-high tariffs had put America on the "road to ruin" by inviting retaliation and suffocating investment. It was a painful lesson and it took decades of sustained global effort, led by America, to bring tariffs down and let commerce flourish.
Trump sees tariffs as a simple tool to achieve multiple objectives: shrinking America's trade deficit, rebuilding its manufacturing might and generating a gusher of revenue for the government. On every count, he is wrong. That is hardly a recipe for a manufacturing renaissance.
Like Trump, America's 25th president William McKinley was a "tariff man" as he swung America towards protectionism in the late 19th century. "President McKinley made our country very rich through tariffs and through talent," said Trump in his inaugural address.
"We must not repose in fancied security that we can forever sell everything and buy little or nothing," McKinley announced in Buffalo, New York, in 1901, before adding that "commercial wars are unprofitable". America's 45th and 47th president has perhaps not learnt correct lessons from his predecessor.
Trump has announced plans for tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico since taking office, but many other countries worldwide are also bracing for similar measures.
It was Trump's latest trade threat against China, the world's second-largest economy after the US, and Washington's biggest geopolitical rival, according to Al Jazeera TV channel.
If the intent of the proposed tariffs was to hurt Chinese exports, in a bid to push for US interests in their trade relationship, Trump's threats - so far at least - appear to have had the opposite effect. China's overall exports, including to the US, have grown in recent months.
In the first 11 months of 2024, Chinese exports to the US totalled about $401 billion, while China imported approximately $131 billion in goods from the US.
International trade expert and economic analyst Aadil Nakhoda, who is also Assistant Professor at IBA Karachi and Chair of the Economic Advisory Group, said Trump's tariffs on China are likely to cost the US economy as well as create challenges for firms participating in international trading activities.
Some calculations suggest that the US economy may shrink up to 1% and face job losses of approximately 700,000. It will also lead to high prices for consumers, with the poorer segment more likely to be impacted based on their income levels.
Several consumer items are likely to become more expensive as China is a major source for them. It may also affect the quality of products as American producers may not have the necessary alternative inputs and expertise in products where Chinese businesses are the main producers. Therefore, it will impact the price and quality of products.
"We may also observe retaliation by the Chinese government to reduce their dependence on American imports. We will likely experience supply chain disruptions as raw material and intermediate goods suppliers may see shifts and reduction in demand. Volatility in prices will also impact other countries as both the US and China are major importers and exporters of several products," Nakhoda said.
Regional expert and Centre for South Asia & International Studies (CSAIS) Islamabad Executive Director Dr Mehmoodul Hassan Khan said as expected Donald Trump thundered about imposing high tariffs on Chinese goods in his inaugural speech, showing imminent start of trade war 2.0 with China. Thus, Trump once again played the "tariff card".
Ironically, the US central bank authorities, the Peterson Institute for International Economics and Moody's, all believe that the additional 10% tariff will cause US inflation to rise by 0.9 to 1.5 percentage points and its GDP growth to fall by 1 to 1.4 percentage points, vividly reflecting the severe economic impact of high tariffs on Chinese goods and creating no good for the US economy, industry, supply chain, society, consumer market and last but not least automobile, steel, engineering and household industries will also be affected. Therefore, the 10% additional tariff will reduce annual household incomes by $2,576, taking into account the impact of possible retaliation.
Moreover, the estimation of the Centre for American Progress should be a wake-up call for Trump's administration that it would result in a tax increase of $3,900 for a middle-income family, thus middle-class Americans are in the line of fire after the imposition of 10% tariffs on Chinese goods. It is expected that income and resource distribution will be further tilted towards the rich, which will widen the wealth and income gap in the US.
The latest report of the National Retail Federation warns that a universal 10-20% tariff on imports from all foreign countries and an additional 60-100% tariff on imports specifically from China could cost Americans $78 billion in annual spending power. Ultimately, low-income families will be worse off by tariff hikes than the richer ones.
It seems that extra tariffs will not help revive the US manufacturing industry. The US economy, particularly its manufacturing industry that imports intermediate products in large quantities, is propelled by and dependent on global value chains. More tariffs will only increase their production costs and reduce their competitiveness. So, the US importers have strictly opposed swelling tariffs.
Research by Moody's shows that the trade war with China caused the loss of 300,000 American jobs between July 2018 and August 2019. The Tax Foundation estimates that new tariffs will shrink US GDP by at least 0.8% and cost 684,000 full-time jobs.
"Trump's high tariff syndrome would backfire, subduing capital flows, reducing investments, discouraging joint ventures and development of green technologies (solar, wind, lithium batteries and hydrogen power generation). It would not help US firms compete well with foreigners, but will largely shut down international capital movements. Thus, healthy competition and cooperation between the US and China should be the way forward," Khan said.
The writer is a staff correspondent

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Oil up on hopes of positive US-China trade talks
Oil up on hopes of positive US-China trade talks

Business Recorder

timean hour ago

  • Business Recorder

Oil up on hopes of positive US-China trade talks

NEW YORK: Oil prices edged up 1% to a seven-week high on Tuesday on hopes trade talks between the US and China - the world's two biggest economies - will result in a deal that could support global economic growth and boost oil demand. Brent crude futures rose 81 cents, or 1.2%, to $67.85 a barrel by 11:22 a.m. EDT (1522 GMT), while US West Texas Intermediate crude rose 83 cents, or 1.3%, to $66.12. Those gains pushed both crude benchmarks into technically overbought territory for the first time since early April and put Brent on track for its highest close since April 17 and WTI on track for its highest close since April 3. US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said trade talks with China were going well as the two sides met for a second day in London, seeking a breakthrough on export controls that have threatened a fresh rupture between the superpowers. 'There's a sense of optimism around these trade talks; the market is waiting to see what this will produce, and that is supporting prices,' said Harry Tchilinguirian, group head of research at Onyx Capital. On the supply side, allocations to Chinese refiners showed that Saudi Arabia's state oil company Saudi Aramco will ship about 47 million barrels of oil to China in July, 1 million barrels less than June's allotted volume, Reuters reported. The Saudi allocations could be an early sign that the unwinding of OPEC+ production cuts might not result in much additional supply, Tchilinguirian said. OPEC+, which pumps about half of the world's oil and includes the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and allies like Russia, put forward plans for an output increase of 411,000 barrels per day (bpd) for July as it looks to unwind production cuts for a fourth straight month. A Reuters survey found that OPEC's May increase to oil output was limited, with Iraq, the second biggest OPEC producer behind Saudi Arabia, pumping below target to compensate for earlier overproduction, and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates making smaller increases than agreed. Elsewhere, Iran said it would soon make a counter-proposal for a nuclear deal in response to a US offer that Tehran deems 'unacceptable', while US President Donald Trump made clear that the two sides remained at odds over whether Tehran would be allowed to continue enriching uranium on Iranian soil. Iran is the third-largest OPEC producer and any easing of US sanctions on Tehran should allow Iran to export more oil, which should reduce crude prices.

Copper slips on uncertainty over trade talks, demand
Copper slips on uncertainty over trade talks, demand

Business Recorder

timean hour ago

  • Business Recorder

Copper slips on uncertainty over trade talks, demand

LONDON: Copper prices lost ground on Tuesday as many investors shunned the market due to uncertainty about US-China trade talks and how the ongoing trade war between the world's two largest economies will hit economic growth and metals demand. Benchmark three-month copper on the London Metal Exchange was down 0.3% at $9,767 per metric ton in official open-outcry trading, having recovered by 20% since hitting its lowest since November 2023 in April. 'We have a lot of market complacency right now. Volatility seems to be drifting lower across markets even though we have yet to see any breakthrough on trade talks with China,' said Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank in Copenhagen. Top US and Chinese officials will resume trade talks for a second day in London on Tuesday, hoping to secure a breakthrough over export controls for rare earths and other goods. More copper inventories departed from LME-registered warehouses as traders took advantage of higher US prices due to expectations that US President Donald Trump will impose tariffs on the metal, following duties levied on aluminium and steel. LME copper stocks eroded by another 2,000 tons to 120,400, data showed on Tuesday, having tumbled by half over the past three months. US Comex copper futures dropped 0.7% to $4.89 a lb, bringing the premium of Comex over the LME to $1,016 a ton. 'The appetite is failing somewhat, especially in the New York market, because the tariff announcement will be a binary event and some fireworks can probably not be avoided once you get that news out.' Traders are awaiting the outcome of an investigation Trump ordered in February on potential import tariffs on copper. In China, zinc on the Shanghai Futures Exchange softened for a third trading day, losing 1.3% to 21,845 yuan a ton, the lowest since late April. 'China's domestic demand has shown signs of weakening recently, and buyers have been procuring to meet their immediate needs at lower prices,' Shanghai-based commodity market research house SHMET said. Among other LME metals, aluminium eased 0.1% to $2,476 a metric ton, nickel ceded 0.9% to $15,280, zinc was little changed at $2,649, lead fell 0.2% to $1,982, while tin edged up 0.1% to $32,730.

China's angry rebuttal to Trump's tariff Tsunami
China's angry rebuttal to Trump's tariff Tsunami

Business Recorder

timean hour ago

  • Business Recorder

China's angry rebuttal to Trump's tariff Tsunami

My reading of China has always been of a country that is sagacious, forgiving and accommodating—an entity flowing naturally through history, shaped by the burden and blessing of over 5,000 years of civilizational legacy. China has long carried the unique distinction of never being an occupying force in the historical sense, never driven by the imperial ambition to rule the world. Despite holding immense power at different junctures in history, China refrained from conquest. Its Great Wall was built not as a launchpad for outward domination, but as a safeguard for inward integration. This tradition of strategic restraint and internal focus has morphed into the philosophical foundation of President Xi Jinping's economic and diplomatic agenda in the 21st century. China's foreign policy, even amid rising global tensions, has maintained its emphasis on win-win cooperation, mutual growth, and infrastructural diplomacy. It does not promote regime change, nor does it meddle in the internal politics of other nations. China's strength lies in its ability to uplift weaker economies through massive infrastructure projects, energy support, port development, and institutional capacity-building. These efforts are not intended to dominate but to elevate. That is the spirit of China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), offering struggling nations an alternative model of growth without conditionalities that mirror neo-colonialism. In contrast, the Trump administration's aggressive 'America First' policy has been marked by an unrelenting tariff war, often in violation of international norms, bilateral treaties, and the principles of the World Trade Organization (WTO). These tariffs were not just protectionist; they were unilateral assaults on the interconnected architecture of the global economy. By weaponizing tariffs, Trump sought to coerce trading partners and reconfigure supply chains through brute economic power. However, in doing so, the administration not only antagonized allies and adversaries alike but also disrupted global trade balances, supply chains, and investor confidence. The global economy is an ecosystem. If one part of it is harmed, the ripple effects are felt across continents. In this context, the Trump tariffs didn't just target China—they undermined the very structure of global trade and collaboration. The United States, which once championed free trade, suddenly became its greatest disruptor. This led to global uncertainty, inflation in various sectors, and rising consumer prices within the United States itself. In response to this unprecedented tariff regime, China issued its strongest economic and diplomatic rebuttal to date. Breaking from its traditional quiet diplomacy, Beijing made it unequivocally clear that it would not succumb to unilateral economic bullying. For the first time, Chinese officials accused the United States of distorting international trade norms and harming global economic recovery. China argued that the United States had, in fact, been the largest beneficiary of globalization. With a massive 25% share in world trade, the US economic dominance was built on the very trade practices it was now dismantling. China emphasized that it did not initiate the trade war but would not hesitate to defend its interests. It pledged to open up its economy further, reduce tariffs, and increase imports—not out of compulsion, but to demonstrate its commitment to global cooperation. This stands in sharp contrast to the inward-looking, protectionist tendencies of the Trump administration. China's response was calm but resolute. It promised to uphold the principles of extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits. It reaffirmed its belief in genuine multilateralism, rejecting all forms of unilateralism and economic coercion. China stood firmly in support of the international system with the United Nations at its core and the multilateral trading system with the WTO at its foundation. China's declaration also emphasized that the vast majority of nations still believed in fairness, justice, and the rule of international law. These countries, it argued, would eventually stand on the right side of history—not because of allegiance to any one superpower, but because equity must triumph over hegemony. Trump, meanwhile, sought to justify the economic fallout from his tariff blitzkrieg by promising future investments totaling $7 trillion. However, even he admitted that the US stock market had lost nearly $6 trillion in value within days. While the theoretical future investment may or may not materialize over four to five years, the immediate damage was undeniable. The American consumer bore the brunt of the tariffs, with increased prices on everything from electronics to household goods. What Trump failed to recognize—or perhaps chose to ignore—is that tariffs on imports function as a hidden tax on American citizens. When tariffs are levied on goods from China or any other country, US importers pass those costs onto retailers, who in turn pass them onto consumers. So, while the US Treasury may gain in the short term from tariff revenues, it is ultimately the American people who pay the price. This disconnect between political rhetoric and economic reality triggered public backlash. Demonstrations erupted across the United States, not just from ideological opponents of Trump but from ordinary citizens suffering from inflation and job insecurity. The symbols associated with Trump's protectionist agenda—banners, flags, and campaign props—became the targets of public outrage, a visible expression of disillusionment with failed promises and mounting hardship. The damage was not just economic; it was reputational. America's standing as a leader of the free world, a promoter of open markets and democratic values, was called into question. The aggressive imposition of tariffs on allies and adversaries alike sent a message that America was retreating from the world stage, abandoning its commitments, and undermining its credibility. What is the via media in this escalating trade conflict? The answer lies in dialogue, cooperation, and mutual respect. Instead of unilaterally imposing tariffs, the United States must return to the table and engage its partners through negotiation, evidence-based studies, and inclusive policy-making. Any trade policy that causes disproportionate harm to a segment of the global population—be it American or foreign—is inherently flawed. Tariffs should be the last resort, not the first weapon of choice. They must be evaluated based on who truly benefits and who bears the cost. If the people of both nations stand to gain, then policy adjustments may be justified. But if tariffs disproportionately hurt consumers, strain diplomatic ties, and fracture global supply chains, then they are not only counterproductive but dangerous. The world today demands cooperation over confrontation. It requires strategic empathy rather than economic nationalism. China's model of infrastructure-led diplomacy and economic integration may not be perfect, but it offers an alternative vision to brute-force protectionism. A world driven by consultation and shared prosperity is far more stable than one governed by unilateral decrees and economic coercion. The battle between tariff wars and trade cooperation is not just a contest of policies—it is a contest of visions. The world must choose between retreating into silos or building bridges across continents. In this defining moment, China's calm and strategic response to Trump's aggressive tariffs may well mark a turning point in the global order. It is a call for equity—not hegemony. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

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