logo
Trump extends tariff truce with China for 90 days

Trump extends tariff truce with China for 90 days

Yahoo2 days ago
US President Donald Trump has ordered a 90-day extension to a US-China tariff truce, hours before it was due to expire – keeping higher duties on hold until November 10 as both sides continue trade talks.
US President Donald Trump on Monday ordered a delay in the reimposition of higher tariffs on Chinese goods, hours before a trade truce between Washington and Beijing was due to expire.
The White House's halt on steeper tariffs will be in place until November 10.
"I have just signed an Executive Order that will extend the Tariff Suspension on China for another 90 days," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.
While the United States and China slapped escalating tariffs on each other's products this year, bringing them to prohibitive triple-digit levels and snarling trade, both countries in May agreed to temporarily lower them.
Their 90-day halt of steeper levies had been due to expire Tuesday.
Around the same time that Trump confirmed the new extension, Chinese state media Xinhua news agency published a joint statement from US-China talks in Stockholm saying it would also extend its side of the truce.
China will continue suspending its earlier tariff hike for 90 days starting August 12 while retaining a 10-percent duty, the report said.
It would also "take or maintain necessary measures to suspend or remove non-tariff countermeasures against the United States, as agreed in the Geneva joint declaration," Xinhua reported.
In the executive order posted Tuesday to its website, the White House reiterated its position that there are "large and persistent annual US goods trade deficits" and they "constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States."
The order acknowledged Washington's ongoing discussions with Beijing "to address the lack of trade reciprocity in our economic relationship" and noted that China has continued to "take significant steps toward remedying" the US complaints.
The 90-day extension means the truce is now set to expire just after midnight on November 10.
- Trump-Xi summit? -
"Beijing will be happy to keep the US-China negotiation going, but it is unlikely to make concessions," warned William Yang, an analyst at the International Crisis Group.
He believes China sees its leverage over rare earth exports as a strong one, and that Beijing will likely use it to pressure Washington.
US-China Business Council president Sean Stein said the current extension is "critical to give the two governments time to negotiate an agreement" providing much-needed certainty for companies to make plans.
A trade deal, in turn, would "pave the way for a Trump-Xi summit this fall," said Asia Society Policy Institute senior vice president Wendy Cutler.
But Cutler, herself a former US trade official, said: "This will be far from a walk in the park."
Even as both countries reached a pact to cool tensions after high level talks in Geneva in May, the de-escalation has been shaky.
Key economic officials convened in London in June as disagreements emerged and US officials accused their counterparts of violating the pact. Policymakers met again in Stockholm last month.
Trump said in a social media post Sunday that he hoped China will "quickly quadruple its soybean orders," adding this would be a way to balance trade with the United States.
As part of their May truce, fresh US tariffs targeting China were reduced to 30 percent and the corresponding level from China was cut to 10 percent.
Separately, since returning to the presidency in January, Trump has slapped a 10-percent "reciprocal" tariff on almost all trading partners, aimed at addressing trade practices Washington deemed unfair.
This surged to varying steeper levels last Thursday for dozens of economies.
Major partners like the European Union, Japan and South Korea now see a 15-percent US duty on many products, while the level went as high as 41 percent for Syria.
The "reciprocal" tariffs exclude sectors that have been targeted individually, such as steel and aluminum, and those that are being investigated like pharmaceuticals and semiconductors.
They are also expected to exclude gold, although a clarification by US customs authorities made public last week caused concern that certain gold bars might still be targeted.
Trump said Monday that gold imports will not face additional tariffs, without providing further details.
The president has taken separate aim at individual countries such as Brazil over the trial of former president Jair Bolsonaro, who is accused of planning a coup, and India over its purchase of Russian oil.
Canada and Mexico come under a different tariff regime.
(AFP)
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Jack Dorsey declares victory over China in Bitcoin mining chip race
Jack Dorsey declares victory over China in Bitcoin mining chip race

Yahoo

time13 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Jack Dorsey declares victory over China in Bitcoin mining chip race

Jack Dorsey declares victory over China in Bitcoin mining chip race originally appeared on TheStreet. Twitter co-founder and Block, Inc. (NYSE: XYZ) boss Jack Dorsey thinks his team has outdone China in Bitcoin mining chips. Bitcoin mining is the process of using high-end computers to solve cryptographic functions, validate BTC transactions, and add blocks to the network in return for BTC rewards. Dorsey's fintech venture Block has increasingly adopted Bitcoin over the years, and its unit Proto is dedicated to Bitcoin mining. Proto, aiming to decentralize the supply of Bitcoin mining hardware and the distribution of hash rate, is expected to launch a suite of mining chips on Aug. 14. An X user wondered if Dorsey's Proto has "out engineered" China on Bitcoin mining chips, as it would turn the industry upside down. Dorsey simply responded, "we have." On Aug. 13, Block made another major announcement that it will privately raise $1.5 billion for general corporate purposes. How does Trump's China tariff policy affect Bitcoin mining? While the U.S. is the leading Bitcoin mining country in terms of hash rate, it is China that takes the lead in manufacturing mining rig equipment. The world's three largest manufacturers of Bitcoin mining machines, namely Bitmain, Canaan, and MicroBT — all of Chinese origin — build over 90% of global mining rigs. Bitcoin miners, including those based in the U.S., are highly dependent on the mining hardware supply from China. But President Donald Trump's aggressive tariff policy targeted toward China has the U.S. mining industry concerned about its prospects. This is where domestic players like Block come like Block, which recently joined the S&P 500 list, can manufacture Bitcoin mining rigs in the U.S. Co-founder and chairman Dorsey even said during the Q1 2025 earnings call, 'We're building in the United States.' Block's efforts notwithstanding, it will take a few years for the complete onshoring of the Bitcoin mining manufacturing. U.S. manufacturers of mining rigs face the dual challenge of exceeding or at least meeting China's product quality and undercutting its manufacturing costs. The onshoring process could also potentially come to a pause if the U.S. and China reach a long-term consensus on the tariff policy which doesn't put a heavy tax burden on imports of Chinese mining chips. Jack Dorsey declares victory over China in Bitcoin mining chip race first appeared on TheStreet on Aug 13, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Aug 13, 2025, where it first appeared. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Google Finds Workaround for Lobbying Rules That Omits Big Bosses
Google Finds Workaround for Lobbying Rules That Omits Big Bosses

Yahoo

time13 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Google Finds Workaround for Lobbying Rules That Omits Big Bosses

(Bloomberg) — It was the end of 2018, and Google's leaders were tired of being Number One. For the second year in a row, federal records showed the search giant had spent more than any other individual company on lobbying in Washington. Executives in Mountain View were sick of seeing that mentioned in the press. Sunseeking Germans Face Swiss Backlash Over Alpine Holiday Congestion The US-Canadian Road Safety Gap Is Getting Wider To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' Five Years After Black Lives Matter, Brussels' Colonial Statues Remain For Homeless Cyclists, Bikes Bring an Escape From the Streets Then Google apparently found a workaround. A new analysis of federal lobbying data by the nonprofit Tech Transparency Project shows that Google and its parent company, Alphabet Inc. used an internal reorganization to exclude the value of lobbying by its senior executives from disclosures. The move helped keep Google off the top of the lobbying charts even as it maintained a robust network of advocates pushing its interests in the capital, during federal challenges to its dominance in search and advertising and the beginnings of artificial intelligence regulation. The findings, which were confirmed by a Bloomberg analysis of lobbying records, show that the effect of the accounting change was to lower the amount that Google reported spending to influence the federal government, likely by millions of dollars. The reorganization 'has allowed the company to shield a significant portion of its lobbying expenditures from public view,' the Tech Transparency Project said in its report. A Google spokesperson, José Castañeda, disputed the report and said the company has followed all relevant disclosure laws. 'These are inaccurate claims about a technical change that simply brought us in line with how many other companies report their lobbying activities,' he said. 'Our lobbying expenditures began decreasing in 2018, after we restructured our government affairs team and cut spending on consultants.' Internal Reshuffle Starting in 2019, Google began cutting ties with some of its external lobbying firms, a move it acknowledged publicly as part of an overhaul of its Washington operations. But the shuffling of external lobbying firms doesn't explain the whole of the decline in Google's reported lobbying expenses, which fell from more than $22 million in 2018 to $8.9 million in the Covid-disrupted year of 2020, and have subsequently remained well below pre-pandemic levels. There's been another, quieter change: in early 2020, Google moved its in-house lobbyists into a new subsidiary, called Google Client Services LLC. It's that unit which now files spending disclosures for Google's lobbying activities. The reorganization meant that the parent companies Google and Alphabet no longer directly employed any lobbyists – defined under federal disclosure law as people spending at least 20% of their time on influencing Congress or the executive branch. Companies that file lobbying disclosure reports are supposed to also account for the time that other senior executives — those who don't meet the 20% threshold – devote to lobbying, according to legal experts and the compliance guide for the Lobbying Disclosure Act published by Congressional leaders. That generally involves prorating their annual compensation to account for the days they spend influencing the government. But since Google moved lobbyists into the Google Client Services subsidiary, the parent company no longer meets the threshold for filing disclosures under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, according to the TTP analysis. That means Google no longer reports the lobbying expenses of high-ranking managers who aren't part of the Client Services unit — like Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai and chief legal officer Kent Walker — to the public, as it once did. As a result, in 2020 Google dropped out of the top 20 in corporate lobbying expenses for the first time in nearly a decade, the TTP analysis found. While Google's reported annual spending has since edged back up again, it hasn't come close to the No.1 slot in the company lobbying rankings that it used to occupy. For the past five years, that position has alternated between two other tech giants: Meta Platforms Inc. and Inc. Antitrust Challenge There's been plenty going in in Washington over the period that was crucial for Google's business. For one thing, the company — like many peers — is betting heavily on AI, a field where decisions in the US capital will shape the commercial landscape. Google has also been under assault from antitrust authorities over its dominance in search and digital advertising. The company has maintained in those lawsuits that its success is down to consumer choice and superior innovation, rather than a result of its power to shape laws and regulations. Publicity around its lobbying spending has the potential to undercut such arguments and alienate regulators. When executives are as highly paid as many in Silicon Valley, the prorated amounts can add up to millions — even for just a few days' worth of lobbying. Google reported total compensation for Pichai of more than $225 million in 2022, thanks to grants of stock. His total compensation was $10.7 million in 2024. Walker's total compensation was more than $30 million last year, the company reported. Some say the new structure Google is employing flouts the spirit of the federal disclosure law – if not the letter itself. 'This is just too cute by half,' said William Luneburg, a professor emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and the co-editor of the manual for lobbying compliance published by the American Bar Association. 'On the face of it, it's wrong,' he said. 'They have to report all of their expenses, which would include the time of officers and directors and other employees that spend their time engaging in lobbying activity.' 'We always comply with disclosure laws and any suggestion of improper reporting is false,' said Castañeda, the Google spokesperson. TTP said it examined lobbying disclosures of several other companies that filed reports via a similar subsidiary model, but didn't find any that had used the structure to remove executive lobbying from their disclosures. —With assistance from Davey Alba and Sarah Frier. Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates Dubai's Housing Boom Is Stoking Fears of Another Crash Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan Why It's Actually a Good Time to Buy a House, According to a Zillow Economist A $340 Million New York Office Makeover Is Converting Boardrooms to Bedrooms ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

A court victory for Trump's foreign aid cuts, briefly explained
A court victory for Trump's foreign aid cuts, briefly explained

Vox

time16 minutes ago

  • Vox

A court victory for Trump's foreign aid cuts, briefly explained

President Donald Trump in the State Dining Room of the White House on August 8, 2025. Nathan Howard/Bloomberg via Getty Images This story appeared in The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here. Welcome to The Logoff: The Trump administration's decision to cancel billions in foreign aid can stand, a federal appeals court said today, in a major blow to global humanitarian aid. What did the court actually decide? A three-judge panel on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the plaintiffs in the case weren't eligible to bring the suit in the first place. The majority found that only the Government Accountability Office can challenge the administration's decision to withhold congressionally appropriated funds under a specific process laid out in the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. What's the context for this decision? Donald Trump and Elon Musk made US foreign aid programs one of their first targets upon taking power in January. Musk boasted about feeding the US Agency for International Development 'into the wood chipper,' and Trump withheld billions in spending already authorized by Congress. A number of humanitarian nonprofits sued to restore the withheld funds, alleging it was an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers — but today's ruling punts on that question altogether, instead focusing on procedure. What will the impact of this freeze be? To put it simply, US foreign aid saves lives, and cutting it will cost them. Among the money the Trump administration will now be allowed to withhold is billions of dollars in funding for HIV/AIDS prevention and other global health programs. As the New York Times calculated earlier this year, the potential death toll for slashing US aid is more than 1.5 million people in 2025 alone; many, including young children, have already died. The Logoff The email you need to stay informed about Trump — without letting the news take over your life. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. What else should I know? Separate from the human impact, this is a significant decision for the Trump administration's efforts to impound congressionally appropriated funds, for foreign aid and other purposes. Unless or until the GAO sues over impoundment, the administration can keep at it and keep chipping away at the separation of powers in the process. And with that, it's time to log off… You know what The Logoff hasn't featured in a while? That's right — an animal livestream. Today I'm spotlighting one of my favorites from Brooks Falls in Katmai National Park, Alaska.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store