scholarly journals A Perspective on CHN-US Trade Relations Based on the Perspective of the New Crown Epidemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 58-61
Author(s):  
Chengshuang Lv ◽  
Caihui Wang ◽  
Jiaojiao Xu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Trade Friction ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
Trade Relationship ◽  
Reform And Opening Up

The Covid-19 pneumonia epidemic has broken out and spread in more than 215 countries, with more than 7 million confirmed cases worldwide, which will definitely have a huge negative impact on the global economy, and it has also given birth to populism and trade protectionism in some countries such as the United States. In particular, the trade friction between China and the United States has not been completely resolved, and the direction of the trade relationship has become an important issue in the post-epidemic era. Using retrospective research methods, dynamic analysis methods, and path analysis methods, we discovered the uncertainties in Sino-US trade relations under the epidemic. In the post-epidemic era, Sino-US trade relations will show long-term trade disputes, accompanied by complex politicization and normalization of talks while fighting. However, Sino-US trade is highly interdependent and cannot be divided. Therefore, China upholds to jointly build a community with a shared future for mankind, comprehensively deepens reform and opening up, adheres to dialogue and consultation, stabilizes the ballast of economic and trade relations, crosses the "Thucydides trap", and implements the strategy of expanding domestic demand to take the lead in restoring the economy during the epidemic. Responding to the trade war provoked by the United States against China also provides reference for in-depth research on trade-related theories.

A Comparative Study between Sino-US and Japan-US Trade Frictions with Big Data Technology

2014 ◽  
Vol 687-691 ◽  
pp. 4950-4954 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rong Sheng Lv ◽  
Chun Hui Wang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Trade Deficit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Healthy Development ◽  
Trade Friction ◽  
Trade Sanctions ◽  
Trade Frictions ◽  
Big Data Technology

China and the United States are the two largest economies in the world, and there is a strong complementarily between their economies, so the volume of their bilateral trade is also very large. However, with the development of trade exchanges, bilateral trade friction also intensifies; especially in recent years, American trade deficit with China has grown very rapidly. In order to reverse the situation, the United States launched several trade litigations and implemented tough trade sanctions against China. It led to trade disputes between the two countries, which seriously damaged the healthy development of Sino-US relation. So we compares the similarities and differences between the two trade frictions, pointing out both valuable experience and negative lessons from Japan in handling Japan-US trade friction, so as to provide reference to China for easing Sino-US trade friction.

scholarly journals Nervous Giant: China and the Financial Crisis

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-11
Author(s):  
Patrick Farrell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Trade Relationship ◽  
Current Financial Crisis ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Global Financial Crisis

While the current financial crisis is widely acknowledged to be global, surprisingly little attention has been paid to its effect on one of the largest players in the global economy. China has weathered the crisis extremely well, though its growth has slowed slightly. I will analyze this by looking at China’s purchases of debt, the Chinese holdings of debt in the United States and its growing holdings in Europe, and the policy decisions directing this. This shows an intriguing change in the policy decisions that led to China becoming such a large holder of American debt. China amassed its large holdings of debt from the United States by merit of the strong trade relationship between the two countries, as well as the stability of the U.S. dollar. However, China’s interest in buying up Italian debt and forming stronger bonds with other Eurozone and European countries seems to speak to a different motive. Rather than allowing its reserves of foreign capital to grow over time, as it did with its U.S. debt, China is making a more aggressive move in this case. Thanks to its relative stability during the crisis, I believe this shows us that China is seeking to both ensure the continued security of its economic growth and increase its economic influence, thus using the instability of the global financial crisis to kill two birds with one stone.

scholarly journals Regional Economic Outlook, October 2019, Western Hemisphere Department

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Developing Economies ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Regional Growth ◽  
Commodity Prices ◽  
The United States ◽  
Western Hemisphere ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
Global Growth

The global economy has slowed, with important consequences for growth prospects in Latin America and the Caribbean. The slowdown in economic activity has been broad-based among advanced economies and more pronounced in emerging markets and developing economies, partly reflecting trade and geopolitical tensions. Global growth is projected to decline to the lowest level since the global financial crises, before recovering in 2020. More importantly, growth is projected to decline in 2019–20 in the United States and China, which are LAC’s two main trading partners. The ongoing sluggishness of global growth and trade is affecting export growth in LAC, posing significant headwinds to the outlook. External demand for the region remains subdued, with trading partner growth (including China, Europe, other LAC countries, and the United States) projected to decline in 2019, before recovering modestly over the medium term. Moreover, commodity prices (notably energy and metals), key drivers of growth in LAC in the past, are projected to decline with a likely modest negative impact on regional growth going forward.

scholarly journals Trump Administration Continues Trade Negotiations with Major Trade Partners

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-142
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
United States Mexico ◽  
Other Regarding ◽  
Trade Partners ◽  
Trump Administration

In the fall of 2019, the Trump administration reached several trade arrangements, some of them tentative, with important U.S. trade partners. On October 11, 2019, China and the United States announced a preliminary trade deal subject to finalization—one that came after more than a year of escalating tariffs. Just a week earlier, the United States had signed two trade agreements with Japan, one regarding tariff reductions and the other regarding digital trade. None of these deals appear to require subsequent congressional approval in the eyes of the executive branch, unlike the earlier United States-Mexico-Canada-Agreement (USMCA), which was signed in November 2018 and whose fate in Congress appears promising as of mid-December of 2019. In addition to these trade arrangements, the fall of 2019 saw several developments in trade relations between the United States and the European Union tied to the long-running trade disputes.

scholarly journals Defining and Redefining U.S.-Africa Trade Relations During the Trump Presidency

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 389-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Lande ◽  
Dennis Matanda
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supply Chain ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Supply Chain ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Multilateral Trade ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Trade Relationship ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
Trump Administration

In an era in which multilateral trade arrangements have garnered more public notoriety than ever before, the suboptimal trade and investment relationship between America and Africa, as underpinned by the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), is one of the less controversial ones. AGOA could nevertheless use some adjustments or augmentations to facilitate deeper U.S.-Africa commercial relations. For instance, adjusting AGOA's origin rules could nudge the private sector on both sides of the Atlantic towards gains for U.S. and African employment and the reduction of trade deficits. Africa must leverage the period before AGOA expires to redefine its trade relationship with the United States in innovative ways. The United States should welcome these measures, since the type of value that Africa would add to the global supply chain would not replace the high-quality jobs that the Trump Administration would like to see in the United States. In fact, this type of production would make U.S. manufacturing more competitive.

Economic Impacts of the US–China Trade War on the Asian Economy: An Applied Analysis of IDE-GSM

2021 ◽  
pp. 263168462110322
Author(s):  
Satoru Kumagai ◽  
Toshitaka Gokan ◽  
Kenmei Tsubota ◽  
Ikumo Isono ◽  
Kazunobu Hayakawa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Economic Impacts ◽  
The United States ◽  
China Trade ◽  
Computational General Equilibrium ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trade War ◽  
Asian Economy

In this article, we attempt to estimate the economic impacts of the US–China trade war that began in 2018. We used IDE-GSM, a computational general equilibrium simulation model, to estimate the economic impacts of a ‘full-confrontation’ scenario wherein both countries impose 25% additional tariffs on all goods imported from each other for 3 years 2019 onwards. In our calculation, the economic impact for the United States is −0.4% and −0.5% for China. Some Asian countries benefit from the trade war. As far as it remains bilateral, the trade war is only an issue for the concerned parties. We also ran the US–world trade war scenario, wherein the United States and all other countries impose a 25% additional tariff on all goods. The negative impact on the global economy is –0.8%, much more significant than the 0.1% impact from the US–China trade war. Thus, it is clear that the world cannot afford to engage in a multilateral trade war. JEL Codes: C68, F13

scholarly journals Trade Disputes between China and the United States: growing pains so far, worse ahead?

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-111
Author(s):  
Gary Clyde Gary Clyde Hufbauer ◽  
Jared C. Woollacott
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Logical Consequence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
The Past ◽  
Growing Pains ◽  
History Of ◽  
Section 337

This study covers the history of Sino-US trade relations with a particular focus on the past decade, during which time each has been a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Providing a brief history of 19th and 20th century economic relations, this paper examines in detail the trade disputes that have arisen between China and the United States over the past decade, giving dollar estimates for the trade flows at issue. Each country has partaken in their share of protectionist measures, however, US measures have been characteristically defensive, protecting declining industries, while Chinese measures have been characteristically offensive, promoting nascent industries. We also cover administrative and legislation actions within each country that have yet to be the subject of formal complaint at the WTO. Thisincludes an original and comprehensive quantitative summary of US Section 337 intellectual property rights cases. While we view the frictions in Sino-US trade a logical consequence of the rapid increase in flows between the two countries, we caution that each country work within the WTO framework and respect any adverse decisions it delivers so that a protracted protectionist conflict does not emerge. We see the current currency battle as one potential catalyst for such conflict if US and Chinese policymakers fail to manage it judiciously.

Ocena antykryzysowej polityki gospodarczej Stanów Zjednoczonych i wybranych państw członkowskich Unii Europejskiej w latach 2005–2014

2016 ◽  
pp. 26-46
Author(s):  
Marcin Jan Flotyński
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Financial Markets ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Global Financial Crisis ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
High Volatility ◽  
The Global Financial Crisis ◽  
Domestic Products

The global financial crisis in 2007–2009 began a period of high volatility on the financial markets. Specifically, it caused an increased amplitude of fluctuations of the level of gross domestic products, the level of investment and consumption and exchange rates in particular countries. To address the adverse market circumstances, governments and central banks took actions in order to bolster the weakening global economy. The aim of this article is to present the anti-crisis actions in the United States and selected member states of the European Union, including Poland, and an assessment of their efficiency. The analysis conducted indicates that generally the actions taken in the United States in response to the crisis were faster and more adequate to the existing circumstances than in the European Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document