Did the U.S. Bilateral Goods Deficit With China Increase or Decrease During the US-China Trade Conflict?

FEDS Notes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2945) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hunter L. Clark ◽  
◽  
Anna Wong ◽  

The United States' bilateral goods trade deficit with China appeared to have narrowed substantially since the escalation of the U.S.-China trade conflict in 2018, or so U.S. trade data suggest. By contrast, the Chinese data tell a much different story: the deficit, as implied by China's bilateral surplus, nearly reached historical highs by the end of 2020.

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-55
Author(s):  
Mohamad Zreik

AbstractThe Chinese Ministry of Commerce issued a statement Friday morning, July 6, 2018, confirming the outbreak of a trade war between the United States and China. The statement came after the United States imposed tariffs on many Chinese goods, in violation of international and bilateral agreements, and the destruction of the concept of free trade which the United States calls for following it. It is a war of opposite directions, especially the contradiction between the new Trump policy and the Chinese approach. The proof is what US Defense Secretary James Matisse announced in Singapore in early June 2018 of “the full strategy of the new United States, in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific,” where China was the “sole enemy of the United States” in China’s geostrategic region. Intentions have become publicized, and trade war between the two economic giants is turning into a reality. This paper will give an overview of the US-China scenario of trade war, then a focused analysis on the Trump’s administration economic decision regarding China, and the consequences of this decision.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (04) ◽  
pp. 5-18
Author(s):  
Troy STANGARONE

The origins of the US–China trade war predate the Trump administration’s aggressive stance and have their roots in the economic impact of China’s entry into the WTO and China’s economic practices. The recently concluded phase one deal provides each side a chance to cool the tensions, but the politics in the United States likely preclude a full resolution in the near term. Another consequence of the trade war is the acceleration of production shifts out of China to Southeast Asia, but these opportunities are accompanied by greater US scrutiny of trade with the region.


Author(s):  
Sergey Rogov

In his presentation, the speaker focuses on the problems in relations between the United States and its European NATO allies. Firstly, he talks about the withdrawal of the US troops from Afghanistan, that Sergey M. Rogov considers the first serious defeat of the Western countries since the foundation of NATO. At the same time, he notes the significant military and economic contribution of the U.S. allies to the operation in Afghanistan, and the fact that the US did not take into account the opinion of its allies as well as the issues that may await European countries and the alliance as a whole in this regard. Second, the speaker notes the huge difference in military spending and military capabilities between the United States and the European allies, and concludes that NATO countries will continue to be militarily dependent on the United States. In nuclear sphere, despite the approval of the START III extension by the Biden administration, European countries did not actively resist the collapse of the INF Treaty and the U.S. withdrawal from the Open Skies Treaty. The forthcoming deployment of American missiles in Poland and the Baltic states will further exacerbate of the NATO-Russia crisis. J. Biden's support for the sole purpose concept, which to certain extent implies no first use of nuclear weapons, jeopardizes the U.S. security obligations towards its European allies. Fourth, there is the problem of "new" NATO members, which make minimal contribution to common security, but require economic support and protection from possible Russian aggression. In conclusion, the problem of the U.S.-China confrontation is considered, where the US is actively seeking to involve European countries.


Author(s):  
Victor Adjarho Ovuakporaye

This paper aims to explore the US-China trade war by looking at various issues surrounding the US-China trade relation. The US-China trade war had been imminent since January 2018, meritoriously commenced on 6 July 2018, which is still ongoing. The US imposed sanctions on various Chinese goods, which was counter by the Chinese side also. Both side have felt the effect of the trade war though China felt the impact more than United States. Though, both nations have recently held positive trade talks which leads to the first phase of negotiation the trade war is still ongoing. If the partnership between the United states and China collapses, this will also end up harming the global economy severely since they are crucial cornerstones of the international economy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Manjula Jain ◽  
Saloni Saraswat ◽  
◽  

The US–China trade relationship has expanded immensely after China’s reformation of its economy and liberalization in 1979. A very huge amount of trade takes place between the United States and China in terms of monetary value and quantity. China benefits the United States in several forms other than just trade, such as US firms seeking investment opportunities in China for their assembly units. Subsequently, China holds a huge amount of US treasury securities, and purchases US debt securities, which helps them to keep their interest rates low. However, even after the development of such a trade relationship, the United States has certain concerns relating to China’s intentions. From the United States’ point of view, China is not involved in a fair practice of trade. China has imposed state-directed policies that bend the flow of trade and investment opportunities. Furthermore, the United States has allegations against China pertaining to the issue of intellectual property rights along with mixed records on implementation of WTO obligations, establishment of procedures for impacting the value of its currency and restrictions on FDI. The United States claims that such policies from China’s side make a great impact on the US economy and thus is the concern of the Congress. The current president, Mr. Donald J. Trump, has pledged to promote the free and fair trade policy. So his administration has taken some severe steps to reduce the US bilateral trade deficit. The president first announced the imposition of tariffs on steel and aluminum at 25% and 15%, respectively. To this action of the United States, China retaliated by raising the tariffs on various goods that are imported from the United States. Furthermore, the United States claimed that it would take actions against Chinese intellectual property rights policies that could be a hindrance to the US stakeholders. Later, the United States released a two-stage plan to impose tariffs on Chinese imports that would directly affect Chinese industrial policies for which again there was retaliation by China by releasing their own two-stage plan for American imports that would adversely affect American industries. This paper is an attempt to analyze the effect of the trade war between the United States and China and briefly discusses about the impact of this war on China and the probable measures implemented by the country.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56
Author(s):  
Sai Polineni

President Obama's and President Xi Jinping's visits to Tanzania — and the associated jubliation and fanfare accompanying them — seem to validate much of what has been written in the past few years of the supposed competition between the United States and China for influence and resources in Africa, with many authors proclaiming that the U.S. was losing this competition. Aside from propagating the idea that Africa is some sort of homogenous collection of people, ideas, and cultures, many of these authors view the role of Africa as primarily an economic battleground in which the U.S and China must battle to determine control while ignoring the fact that the differing strengths and focuses of the American and Chinese economies do not lend themselves to any sort of outright competition in Africa. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (22) ◽  
pp. 305-326
Author(s):  
Sandra Žemaitytė ◽  
Laimutė Urbšienė

This paper explores the macroeconomic effects of trade tariffs in the context of the recent trade conflict between the United States and China. The focus is laid on two trade war scenarios, and one of them takes into account the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global trade flows. After deploying the partial equilibrium SMART model, the authors conclude that solely due to the trade war with China, in 2020, the US total trade balance will improve by 41,020 million USD (0.21% of real GDP), while 43,777 million USD (0.22% of real GDP) of the US imports will have to be sourced from other countries. The US trade intensity with China and welfare will decline. However, our study has found that the potential economic consequences of COVID-19 will reduce the relative effects of the trade war. The study has revealed that the United States economy will benefit from the trade war, which can be explained by a relatively weak China’s retaliatory response. Nevertheless, the US agriculture and automotive sectors will suffer most.


Author(s):  
David Nieto

The present paper engages in a historical analysis and interpretation of the policies that have contributed to develop bilingual education in the United States. Departing from the U.S. interpretation of bilingual education, this study examines each of the educational programs that have been implemented in the country since the twentieth century, its pedagogical underpinnings, and the critical evaluation of its outcomes. The paper concludes with an analysis of potential interpretations and lessons that the US case may have for other contexts.


Subject EU-US ties. Significance Attracting the ire of US President Donald Trump, the US goods trade deficit with the EU has widened since 2009. While Trump blames the imbalance on the EU charging higher tariffs on its US imports than the United States charges on its EU imports, the deficit is instead driven by US demand. Most US-EU trade is between foreign affiliates and the declaration between Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in late July reaffirmed the close economic ties between the two blocs. Impacts The prospects for US exports of LNG to the EU will be higher if Chinese retaliatory restrictions remain in place. The US farm lobby will push for agriculture to be covered in the trade negotiations. The negotiations are unlikely to lead to a return to a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership-type deal. Renegotiating US-EU goods trade tariffs will necessarily involve other chapters including services or foreign investment. Escalating trade tariffs would damage the EU but would damage the United States more owing to the size of US-EU cross-border investments.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document