US, China extend tariff truce for additional 90 days
US President Donald Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that he had signed an executive order suspending the imposition of higher tariffs until 12:01 a.m. EST (0501 GMT) on November 10, with all other elements of the truce to remain in place.
China's Commerce Ministry issued a parallel pause on extra tariffs early on Tuesday, also postponing for 90 days the addition of US firms it had targeted in April to trade and investment restriction lists.
'The United States continues to have discussions with the PRC to address the lack of trade reciprocity in our economic relationship and our resulting national and economic security concerns,' Trump's executive order stated, using the acronym for the People's Republic of China. 'Through these discussions, the PRC continues to take significant steps toward remedying non-reciprocal trade arrangements and addressing the concerns of the United States relating to economic and national security matters.'
The tariff truce between Beijing and Washington had been due to expire on Tuesday at 12:01 a.m. EDT (0401 GMT). The extension until early November buys crucial time for the seasonal autumn surge of imports for the Christmas season, including electronics, apparel and toys at lower tariff rates.
The new order prevents US tariffs on Chinese goods from shooting up to 145 percent, while Chinese tariffs on US goods were set to hit 125 percent - rates that would have resulted in a virtual trade embargo between the two countries. It locks in place - at least for now - a 30 percent tariff on Chinese imports, with Chinese duties on US imports at 10 percent.
'We'll see what happens,' Trump told a news conference earlier on Monday, highlighting what he called his good relationship with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
China said the extension was 'a measure to further implement the important consensus reached by the two heads of state during their June 5 call,' and would provide stability to the global economy.
Trump told CNBC last week that the US and China were getting very close to a trade agreement and he would meet with Xi before the end of the year if a deal was struck.
'It's positive news,' said Wendy Cutler, a former senior US trade official who is now a vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute. 'Combined with some of the de-escalatory steps both the United States and China have taken in recent weeks, it demonstrated that both sides are trying to see if they can reach some kind of a deal that would lay the groundwork for a Xi-Trump meeting this fall.'
Trade 'détente' continued
The two sides in May announced a truce in their trade dispute after talks in Geneva, Switzerland, agreeing to a 90-day period to allow further talks. They met again in Stockholm, Sweden, in late July, and US negotiators returned to Washington with a recommendation that Trump extend the deadline.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said repeatedly that the triple-digit import duties both sides slapped on each other's goods in the spring were untenable and had essentially imposed a trade embargo between the world's two largest economies.
'It wouldn't be a Trump-style negotiation if it didn't go right down to the wire,' said Kelly Ann Shaw, a senior White House trade official during Trump's first term and now with law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld.
She said Trump had likely pressed China for further concessions before agreeing to the extension. Trump pushed for additional concessions on Sunday, urging China to quadruple its soybean purchases, although analysts questioned the feasibility of any such deal. Trump did not repeat the demand on Monday.
'The whole reason for the 90-day pause in the first place was to lay the groundwork for broader negotiations and there's been a lot of noise about everything from soybeans to export controls to excess capacity over the weekend,' Shaw said.
Ryan Majerus, a former US trade official now with the King & Spalding law firm, said the news would give both sides more time to work through longstanding trade concerns.
'This will undoubtedly lower anxiety on both sides as talks continue, and as the US and China work toward a framework deal in the fall,' he said.
Imports from China early this year had surged to beat Trump's tariffs, but dropped steeply in June, Commerce Department data showed last week. The US trade deficit with China tumbled by roughly a third in June to $9.5 billion, its narrowest since February 2004. Over five consecutive months of declines, the US trade gap with China has narrowed by $22.2 billion - a 70 percent reduction from a year earlier.
Washington has also been pressing Beijing to stop buying Russian oil to pressure Moscow over its war in Ukraine, with Trump threatening to impose secondary tariffs on China.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
10 minutes ago
- Arab News
US defers to Israel on killing of journalists
WASHINGTON: The United States on Tuesday declined to criticize Israel over the killing of five Al Jazeera journalists in the Gaza Strip, referring questions to its ally. The Israeli military alleged that Anas Al-Sharif, a prominent face on the Qatar-based network covering the violence, headed a Hamas 'terrorist cell' and was 'responsible for advancing rocket attacks' against Israelis. 'What I will tell you is that we refer you to Israel for information regarding Al-Sharif,' State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters. She voiced respect for journalists who cover war zones but said that Hamas members have been 'embedded in society, including posing as journalists.' 'It is a horrible thing to do for those of you who are committed to finding information for people to be in that situation,' she said. European and Arab governments, the United Nations and media rights groups all voiced outrage over the killing. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said that there needed to be 'clear evidence' for Israel's allegations and respect for rules of war against targeting journalists. Al Jazeera said four other employees — correspondent Mohammed Qreiqeh and cameramen Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal and Moamen Aliwa — were also killed when the strike hit a tent set up for journalists outside the main gate of Al-Shifa Hospital. According to local journalists who knew him, Sharif had worked at the start of his career with a Hamas communication office, where his role was to publicize events organized by the group that has ruled the Gaza Strip since 2006.
Al Arabiya
2 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
White House says Trump-Putin meeting is a ‘listening exercise'
Friday's Alaska summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin 'is a listening exercise for the president,' the White House said on Tuesday, tempering expectations for a quick Russia-Ukraine ceasefire deal. 'Only one party that's involved in this war is going to be present, and so this is for the president to go and to get, again, a more firm and better understanding of how we can hopefully bring this war to an end,' said White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt. 'This is a listening exercise for the president.' Trump will meet one-on-one with Putin during the talks, which will take place in Anchorage, Alaska, the White House said. He may, in the future, also visit Russia. 'Perhaps there are plans in the future to travel to Russia,' said Leavitt. Key issues remain ahead of the talks. Trump has said the two sides will need to cede land to end the bloody 3-1/2-year-old conflict. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said his country's constitution prohibits such a deal and that no arrangements can be made without Ukraine's participation in talks. The White House declined to comment on conversations taking place prior to the Putin meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy. Trump said on Monday that Zelenskyy may be invited to a future meeting with Putin. 'The president has deep respect for all parties that are involved in this conflict and are trying to bring this conflict to an end,' said Leavitt.
Arab News
3 hours ago
- Arab News
A heartfelt apology for past misdemeanors can go a long way
Most countries and institutions have a checkered past that they often find difficult to deal with, first by admitting it and then apologizing, followed by learning the necessary lessons and eventually compensating those affected by their misdeeds, even generations later. In the UK, the country is still haunted by the legacy of its involvement in the slave trade, including how it profited from it and how this still affects the descendants of slaves and their countries of origin, with many instances where even today individuals and institutions are still benefiting. Back in 2007, Prime Minister Tony Blair, in a very welcome move, was the first British leader to express his 'deep sorrow' for his country's role in the slave trade. After the slave trade was abolished within the British Empire, it took 200 years for this sentiment to be expressed. But Blair was also criticized by Black rights and other organizations for not going further and issuing a formal apology. One is still yet to be made. More recently, King Charles, during a visit to Kenya, repeated his 'greatest sorrow and regret' at the 'wrongdoings' of the colonial era, but stopped short of an apology. Ultimately, during the transatlantic slave trade, Britain transported and enslaved an estimated 3 million people from Africa. But the abolition of this trade was not the end of slavery, as the ownership of human beings was still permitted — only the trade from Africa to Britain's colonies was abolished, which, although an important step toward the eventual liberation of all those who had been enslaved, saw no apology issued. It leaves open the question: does it mean anything if one expresses sorrow without an apology? And even if an apology is formally issued, what does this mean when it comes two centuries after the slave trade ceased to exist in the country? And most importantly, can we learn from these wrongdoings and genuinely acknowledge that, even today, the descendants of slaves and their countries of origin are paying a price for what happened and should be compensated for that? Worse is the inaction of the same countries that were at the heart of the slave trade when it comes to combating contemporary forms of slavery. Hence, a recently published comprehensive review by the University of Edinburgh, titled 'Slavery, Colonialism and Philanthropy at the University of Edinburgh,' which examines its historical ties to slavery and colonialism, marked an important step toward admitting and addressing the extremely problematic ties between a major British institution and the slave trade. The review, which was led by academics and involved extensive community engagement, also came up with a long list of recommendations for the university to implement in order to overcome this dark aspect of its past. What would probably terrify any contemporary academic at this renowned Scottish University, as any other involved with slavery, is that it played a major role in the creation of racist theories while profiting from slavery. The report confirms that the university benefited from the profits of African enslavement and colonialism through individual contributions and still benefits in that way to this very day. The very idea that the institution 'was a haven for professors and alumni who developed theories of racial inferiority and white supremacism, such as the idea that Africans were inferior to whites and that non-white peoples could be colonized for the profit of European nations,' is obviously shocking. This must encourage all academic institutions to review their safeguards to ensure that their research is neither motivated by a wish to appease their donors, nor is it too conformist, maybe afraid, to challenge the conventional wisdom of the time and publish research that lacks scientific rigor. No institution, let alone an academic one, deserves to maintain its credibility when its researchers compromise what is probably the most precious trait that all scholars must hold on to: their integrity. It is a truism that the past cannot be changed, but it is possible to learn from it. And it is equally important to rectify the mistakes by which certain behaviors caused damage that still reverberates in our societies all these years later. In response to a similar report published several years ago that established that the University of Glasgow benefited from the equivalent of tens of millions of pounds donated from the profits of slavery, the university launched the world's first master's degree in reparatory justice. This was done in partnership with the University of the West Indies as part of a global campaign for financial reparations for transatlantic slavery that has justly entered the discourse as an important tool to compensate for the financial damage and hurt caused by slavery. Similarly, one of the recommendations of the University of Edinburgh report is the creation of a 'Research and Community Centre for the Study of Racism, Colonialism and Anti-Black Violence' to enhance awareness of these issues. Moreover, the report acknowledges that 'Black staff and student population numbers have remained relatively unchanged over the past five years,' showing that not enough is being done in terms of remedying the persecution and discrimination of the past, which is very much a reflection of the situation in wider society. In the UK, the country is still haunted by the legacy of its involvement in the slave trade, including how it profited from it. Yossi Mekelberg There is courage in commissioning such an investigation, in being honest in publishing its findings and in looking for ways to repair the historical wrongdoings that still plague the university. For too long, there has been a prevailing illusion that citizens who are in principle equal in the eyes of the law are also treated equally in society. This is not what members of minorities would attest to as their daily experience, neither in their formative years in education nor when they look for a job and even in their social life. The Windrush scandal is a prime example of how the UK mistreated people, many of them descendants of slaves, who made an immense contribution to rebuilding the country after the Second World War and are still caught up in the ongoing societal and institutional racism. A heartfelt apology by institutions that have directly or even indirectly benefited from slavery could go a long way toward lifting the psychological barrier felt by their descendants vis-a-vis their engagement with society and state. And one coming from the government and the monarch would send a message that the country has owned up to its wrongdoing, even if it came 200 years later.
