# data[].attributes.body
Nur Athirah Amani Binti Azmani

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brands Are 'De-Americanizing' Their Ads to Dodge the Trade War - Business Insider

# data[].attributes.body
Liyana Syafiqah

AM2211012114

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Regulator Criticizes Wells Fargo’s HR in Wake of Phony Accounts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Wells Fargo’s HR department needs to address thousands of complaints from those who say they were wrongfully fired as part of its fake-account problem, according to the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

# data[].attributes.body
Nuralya Natasha

Am2211012111

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nike’s New CEO Has One Hell of a Challenge Ahead | WIRED

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tesla’s Missing $1.4 Billion Has Accounting Experts Asking Questions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Plus, Hyundai is completely unbothered about Trump’s EV policies, and Rivian throws Fisker owners a bone.

# data[].attributes.body
Ameerah Az-Zahra Bt Suhaimi

Am2211012487

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China puts heavy 75% tax on US imports of vital engineering plastic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The levy, which also hits firms from the EU, Japan and Taiwan came despite a 90-day truce in the trade war between the two countries

# data[].attributes.body
Nur Nadhirah Awadah binti Mohd Ibrahim (AM2211012122)

# data[].attributes.body
Qazwini Iffat bin Khairul Azlan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nvidia expects to take $5.5bn hit as US tightens AI chip export rules to China

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Shares plunge as firm says H20 chip, designed for Chinese market to comply with controls, will now need special licence

# data[].attributes.body
Nurin Najwa binti Mohamad Khairi

AM2211012172

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Target cuts annual forecasts as tariff pressure mounts, demand slows further

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(Reuters) -Target slashed its annual sales forecast on Wednesday, after a surprisingly sharp fall in quarterly same-store sales, as customers pulled back on discretionary purchases due to ongoing worries about inflation and the economy due to U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war. Target also said its first-quarter performance was affected by negative reactions to its pullback on diversity, equity and inclusion policies (DEI) in January, which angered some loyal customers who have long praised the company’s commitment to inclusiveness. In the last 12 months, the stock has lost 40% of its value, while Costco shares have gained 30% and Walmart shares have doubled.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The China-United States trade war ( Chinese: ; pinyin: Zhōngměi Màoyìzhàn ) is an ongoing economic conflict between China and the United States. U.S. President Donald Trump in January 2018 began setting tariffs and other trade barriers on China with the goal of forcing it to make changes to what the U.S. says are "unfair trade practices" and intellectual property theft. The Trump administration stated that these practices may contribute to the U.S.-China trade deficit, and that the Chinese government requires transfer of American technology to China. In response to US trade measures, the Chinese government accused the Trump administration of engaging in nationalist protectionism and took retaliatory action. After the trade war escalated through 2019, on January 15, 2020, the two sides reached a phase one agreement, however tensions continued to persist. By the end of the Trump presidency, the trade war was widely characterized as largely a failure.

Since the 1980s, Trump had advocated tariffs to eliminate the U.S. trade deficit and promote domestic manufacturing, saying the country was being "ripped off" by its trading partners; imposing tariffs became a major plank of his presidential campaign. Most economists do not believe trade deficits pose a significant problem for the American economy. Nearly all economists who responded to surveys conducted by the Associated Press and Reuters said Trump's tariffs would do more harm than good to the American economy, and some economists advocated alternate means to address trade deficits with China.

The trade war negatively impacted the economies of both countries. In the United States, it has led to higher costs for manufacturers, higher prices for consumers and financial difficulties for farmers. In China, the trade war contributed to a slowdown in the rate of economic and industrial output growth, which had already been declining. Many American companies have shifted supply chains to elsewhere in Asia, bringing fears that the trade war would lead to a US-China economic 'decoupling'. The trade war has also caused economic damage in other countries, though some benefited from increased manufacturing as production was shifted to them. It also led to stock market instability. Governments around the world have taken steps to address some of the damage caused by the economic conflict.

While there has been broad support for the Trump administration's objective of making China change its trade policies, the use of tariffs and the trade war's negative economic impact have been widely criticized. Among American industries, U.S. businesses and agricultural industries have opposed the trade war, though most farmers continued to support Trump, who provided them with substantial financial support. As the Biden administration began in January 2021, Biden was evaluating the tariffs and pursuing a multilateral approach with allies to confront China.

The volume of trade in goods between the US and China has grown rapidly since the beginning of China's economic reforms in the late 1970s. The growth of trade accelerated after China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, with the US and China becoming one another's most important trading partners. The US has consistently imported more from China than it has exported to China, with the bilateral US trade deficit in goods with China rising to $375.6 billion in 2017.

The US government has at times criticized various aspects of the US-China trade relationship, including large bilateral trade deficits, and China's relatively inflexible exchange rates. The administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama imposed quotas and tariffs on Chinese textiles in order to shield US domestic producers, accusing China of exporting these products at dumping prices. During the Obama administration, the US additionally accused China of subsidizing aluminum and steel production, and initiated a range of anti-dumping investigations against China. However, during these two US administrations, US-Chinese trade continued to grow. During this time, China's economy grew to be the second largest in the world (using nominal exchange rates), second only to that of the US. Large-scale Chinese economic initiatives, such as the Belt and Road Initiative, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and " Made in China 2025" alarmed some US policymakers. More broadly, China's economic growth has been viewed by the US government as a challenge to American economic and geopolitical dominance.

During his 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump promised to reduce the US trade deficit with China, which he attributed to unfair trade practices, such as intellectual property theft and lack of access by US companies to the Chinese market. American proponents of tariffs on China have argued that tariffs will bring manufacturing jobs to the US; that bilateral tariffs should be reciprocal; that the US should eliminate its trade deficit with China; and that China should change various policies governing intellectual property and investment. Most economists are skeptical of the ability of tariffs to achieve the first three of these goals. A study estimates that U.S. exports to China provide support to 1.2 million American jobs and that Chinese multinational companies directly employ 197,000 Americans, while U.S. companies invested $105 billion in China in 2019. Economists have studied the impact of trade with China and increasing labor productivity on employment in the American manufacturing sector, with mixed results. Most economists believe that American trade deficit is the result of macroeconomic factors, rather than trade policy. While increased tariffs on Chinese goods are expected to decrease US imports from China, they are expected to lead to increased imports from other countries, leaving the United States' overall trade deficit largely unchanged - a phenomenon known as trade diversion.

Trump administration's complaints

Donald Trump's first noted advocacy for tariffs was prompted by Japanese economic success in the 1980s, arguing that the U.S. trade deficit was a burden and that tariffs would promote domestic manufacturing that would keep the United States from being "ripped off" by its trading partners. Imposing tariffs was subsequently a major plank of his successful 2016 presidential campaign. In early 2011, he stated that because China has manipulated their currency, "it is almost impossible for our companies to compete with Chinese companies."

In the 2016 US presidential election, Trump ran on a protectionist economic platform. As president, in August 2017, he directed the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to investigate Chinese economic practices. The resulting report, issued in March 2018, attacked many aspects of Chinese economic policy, focusing particularly on alleged technology transfer, which the report stated cost the US economy $225 billion and $600 billion annually. Following the issuing of the report, Trump ordered the imposition of tariffs on Chinese products, the filing of a WTO case against China and restrictions on Chinese investment in high-tech sectors of the US economy.

In supporting tariffs as president, he said that China was costing the American economy hundreds of billions of dollars a year because of unfair trade practices. After imposing tariffs, he denied entering into a trade war, saying the "trade war was lost many years ago by the foolish, or incompetent, people who represented the U.S." He said that the U.S. has a trade deficit of $500 billion a year, with intellectual property (IP) theft costing an additional $300 billion. "We cannot let this continue," he said. Former White House Counsel, Jim Schultz, said that "through multiple presidential administrations - Clinton, Bush and Obama - the United States has naively looked the other way while China cheated its way to an unfair advantage in the international trade market."

According to the administration, the Chinese government's reforms have been minimal and have not been fair and reciprocal: "After years of U.S.-China dialogues that produced minimal results and commitments that China did not honor, the United States is taking action to confront China over its state-led, market-distorting forced technology transfers, intellectual property practices, and cyber intrusions of U.S. commercial networks."

Technology is considered the most important part of the U.S. economy. According to U.S. Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer, China maintains a policy of "forced technology transfer," along with practicing "state capitalism," including buying U.S. technology companies and using cybertheft to gain technology. As a result, officials in the Trump administration were, by early 2018, taking steps to prevent Chinese state-controlled companies from buying American technology companies and were trying to stop American companies from handing over their key technologies to China as a cost of entering their market. According to political analyst Josh Rogin: "There was a belief that China would develop a private economy that would prove compatible with the WTO system. Chinese leadership has made a political decision to do the opposite. So now we have to respond."

Lighthizer said that the value of the tariffs imposed was based on U.S. estimates of the actual economic damage caused by alleged theft of intellectual property and foreign-ownership restrictions that require foreign companies to transfer technology. Such forced Joint ventures give Chinese companies illicit access to American technology.

China's response and counter-allegations

The Chinese government argues that the US government's real goal is to stifle China's growth, and that the trade war has had a negative effect on the world. The Chinese government has blamed the American government for starting the conflict and said that US actions were making negotiations difficult. Zhang Xiangchen, China's ambassador to the World Trade Organization, said the U.S. Trade Representative was operating with a "presumption of guilt", making claims without evidence and based on speculation.

The Chinese government has denied forced transfer of IP is a mandatory practice, and acknowledged the impact of domestic R&D performed in China. Former U.S. treasury secretary Larry Summers assessed that Chinese leadership in some technological fields was the result of "huge government investment in basic science" and not "theft" of U.S. properties. In March 2019, the National People's Congress endorsed a new foreign investment bill, to take effect in 2020, which explicitly prohibits the forced transfer of IP from foreign companies, and grants stronger protection to foreign intellectual property and trade secrets. China had also planned to lift restrictions on foreign investment in the automotive industry in 2022. AmCham China policy committee chair Lester Ross criticized the bill, saying the text of the bill was "rushed" and "broad", and also criticized a portion of the bill that granted the country power to retaliate against countries that impose restrictions on Chinese companies.

On 20 January 2021, China imposed sanctions against outgoing US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former secretary of health and human services Alex Azar, former under secretary of state Keith J. Krach, outgoing US ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft, and 24 other former Trump officials. Biden's National Security Council called the sanctions "unproductive and cynical."

January 22: Trump announced tariffs on solar panels and washing machines. About 8% of American solar panel imports in 2017 came from China. Imports of residential washing machines from China totaled about $1.1 billion in 2015.

March 1: Trump announced steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from all countries. The United States had imported about 3% of its steel from China. The announcement drew criticism from the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal, which called the executive order "the biggest policy blunder of his Presidency."

March 22: Trump asked the United States trade representative (USTR) to investigate applying tariffs on US$50-60 billion worth of Chinese goods. He relied on Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 for doing so, stating that the proposed tariffs were "a response to the unfair trade practices of China over the years", including theft of U.S. intellectual property. Over 1,300 categories of Chinese imports were listed for tariffs, including aircraft parts, batteries, flat-panel televisions, medical devices, satellites, and various weapons.

April 2: Ministry of Commerce of China responded by imposing tariffs on 128 products it imports from America, including aluminum, airplanes, cars, pork, and soybeans (which have a 25% tariff), as well as fruit, nuts, and steel piping (15%). U.S. commerce secretary Wilbur Ross said that the planned Chinese tariffs only reflected 0.3% of U.S. gross domestic product, and Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders stated that the moves would have "short-term pain" but bring "long-term success".

April 3: The U.S. Trade Representative's office published an initial list of 1,300+ Chinese goods to impose levies upon, including products like flat-screen televisions, weapons, satellites, medical devices, aircraft parts and batteries. Chinese Ambassador Cui Tiankai responded by warning the U.S. that they may fight back, saying "We have done the utmost to avoid this kind of situation, but if the other side makes the wrong choice, then we have no alternative but to fight back."

April 5: Trump said that he was considering another round of tariffs on an additional $100 billion of Chinese imports as Beijing retaliates. The next day the World Trade Organization received request from China for consultations on new U.S. tariffs.

May 9: China cancelled soybean orders exported from United States to China. Zhang Xiaoping, Chinese director for the U.S. Soybean Export Council, said Chinese buyers simply stopped buying from the U.S.

May 15: Vice Premier and Politburo member Liu He, top economic adviser to president of China and General Secretary Xi Jinping, visited Washington for further trade talks.

May 20: Chinese officials agreed to "substantially reduce" America's trade deficit with China by committing to "significantly increase" its purchases of American goods. As a result, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announced that "We are putting the trade war on hold". White House National Trade Council director Peter Navarro, however, said that there was no "trade war," but that it was a "trade dispute, fair and simple. We lost the trade war long ago."

May 21: Trump tweeted that "China has agreed to buy massive amounts of ADDITIONAL Farm/Agricultural Products," although he later clarified the purchases were contingent upon the closure of a "potential deal."

June 15: Trump declared that the United States would impose a 25% tariff on $50 billion of Chinese exports. $34 billion would start July 6, 2018, with a further $16 billion to begin at a later date. China's Commerce Ministry accused the United States of launching a trade war and said China would respond in kind with similar tariffs for US imports, starting on July 6. Three days later, the White House declared that the United States would impose additional 10% tariffs on another $200 billion worth of Chinese imports if China retaliated against these U.S. tariffs. The list of products included in this round of tariffs was released on July 11, 2018, and was set to be implemented within 60 days.[citation needed ]

June 19: China retaliates, threatening its own tariffs on $50 billion of U.S. goods, and stating that the United States had launched a trade war. Import and export markets in a number of nations feared the tariffs would disrupt supply chains which could "ripple around the globe."

July 6: American tariffs on $34 billion of Chinese goods came into effect. China imposed retaliatory tariffs on US goods of a similar value. The tariffs accounted for 0.1% of the global gross domestic product. On July 10, 2018, U.S. released an initial list of the additional $200 billion of Chinese goods that would be subject to a 10% tariff. Two days later, China vowed to retaliate with additional tariffs on American goods worth $60 billion annually.

August 8: The Office of the United States Trade Representative published its finalized list of 279 Chinese goods, worth $16 billion, to be subject to a 25% tariff from August 23. In response, China imposed 25% tariffs on $16 billion of imports from the US, which was implemented in parallel with the US tariffs on August 23.

August 14: China filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO), stating that US tariffs on foreign solar panels clash with WTO ruling and have destabilized the international market for solar PV products. China stated that the resulting impact directly harmed China's legitimate trade interests. Peng Peng, a researcher with the China Renewable Energy Industry Association said that the solar problem has existed for years and thought that China chose to bring it up in order to keep up the rhythm of the trade dispute.

September 17: The US announced its 10% tariff on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods would begin on September 24, 2018, increasing to 25% by the end of the year. They also threatened tariffs on an additional $267 billion worth of imports if China retaliates, which China promptly did on September 18 with 10% tariffs on $60 billion of US imports. So far, China has either imposed or proposed tariffs on $110 billion of U.S. goods, representing most of its imports of American products.

November 30: President Trump signed the revised U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The USMCA contains a "rules of origin" provision for automobile that was "touted by the Trump administration as a tool to keep out Chinese inputs and encourage production and investment in the US and North America."

December 1: The planned increases in tariffs were postponed. The White House stated that both parties will "immediately begin negotiations on structural changes with respect to forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, cyber intrusions and cyber theft." According to the Trump Administration, "If at the end of [90 days], the parties are unable to reach an agreement, the 10 percent tariffs will be raised to 25 percent." The U.S. trade representative's office confirmed the hard deadline for China's structural changes is March 1, 2019.

December 11: Trump announced China was buying a "tremendous amount" of U.S. soybeans. Commodities traders saw no evidence of such purchases, and over the next six months soybean exports to China were about one quarter what they were in 2017, before the trade conflict began. China reportedly considered purchases of American farm goods as contingent upon closing a comprehensive trade deal.

January 14: An article in The Wall Street Journal reports that in China's 2018 trade surplus with the United States was a record $323.32 billion despite Trump's tariffs.

March 6: The U.S. Department of Commerce stated that in 2018 the U.S. trade deficit with China reached $621 billion, the highest it had been since 2008.

May 5: Trump stated that the previous tariffs of 10% levied in $200 billion worth of Chinese goods would be raised to 25% on May 10. With notification by USTR, the Federal Register on May 9 published the modification of duty on or after 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time Zone May 10 to 25% for the products of China covered by the September 2018 action. The stated reason being that China reneged upon already agreed upon deals.

May 9: Trump said the tariffs are "paid for mostly by China, by the way, not by us." Economic analysts concluded this was an incorrect assertion as American businesses and consumers ultimately pay the tariffs as real-world examples of tariffs working as intended are rare, and consumers of the tariff-levying country are the primary victims of tariffs, by having to pay higher prices. "It is inaccurate to say that countries pay tariffs on commercial and consumer goods-it is the buyers and sellers that bear the costs," said Ross Burkhart, a Boise State University political scientist. "Purchasers pay the tariff when they buy popular products. Sellers lose market share when their products get priced out of markets," Burkhart added.

May 15: Trump signed executive order 13873, placing Huawei on the Department of Commerce's Entity List. According to Reuters, the move banned Huawei from buying vital parts and components from U.S. companies without special approval and effectively barred its equipment from U.S. telecom networks on national security grounds.

June 1: China will raise tariffs on $60 billion worth of US goods.

June 29: During the G20 Osaka summit, Trump announces he and Xi Jinping agreed to a "truce" in the trade war after extensive talks. Prior tariffs are to remain in effect, but no future tariffs are to be enacted "for the time being" amid restarted negotiations. Additionally, Trump said he would allow American companies to sell their products to Huawei, but the company would remain on the U.S. Entity List. However, the extent of how much this plan to temporarily exempt Huawei from previous bans would be implemented later became unclear and, in the weeks later, there was no clear indication of the reversal of Huawei bans.

June 29: After a meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Trump announces "China is going to be buying a tremendous amount of food and agricultural product, and they're going to start that very soon, almost immediately." China disputed making such a commitment and one month later no such purchases had materialized.

July 11: Trump tweeted "China is letting us down in that they have not been buying the agricultural products from our great Farmers that they said they would." People familiar with the trade negotiations said China had made no firm commitments to purchase farm goods unless it was part of a comprehensive trade agreement.

July 15: Official figures from China showed its second-quarter GDP growth at its slowest in 27 years.

July 17: China announced an accelerated decrease in holdings of US treasury holdings, targeting 25% of its current holdings of $1.1 trillion.

August 1: Trump announced on Twitter that additional 10% tariff will be levied on the "remaining $300 billion of goods".

August 5: The central bank of China (PBOC) let the Renminbi fall over 2% in three days to the lowest point since 2008 as it was hit by strong sales due to the threat of tariffs.

August 5: The U.S. Department of Treasury officially declared China as a Currency Manipulator after the People's Bank of China allowed its yuan to depreciate that, according to CNN, was seen as retaliation to Trump's August 1 tariff announcement. According to an article in the Washington Post, Trump reportedly pressured the Treasury Department Steven Mnuchin to authorize the designation. Both the IMF and the Chinese government have rejected the designation, with the IMF saying that the valuation of the yuan are in line with China's economic fundamentals.

August 5: China ordered state-owned enterprises to stop buying US agricultural products in retaliation to Trump's August 1 tariff announcement. Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, called the move "a body blow to thousands of farmers and ranchers who are already struggling to get by," adding, "Farm Bureau economists tell us exports to China were down by $1.3 billion during the first half of the year. Now, we stand to lose all of what was a $9.1 billion market in 2018, which was down sharply from the $19.5 billion U.S. farmers exported to China in 2017."

August 13: Official figures from China showed its industrial output growth falling amid the trade war to a 17-year low.

August 13: Trump delayed some of the tariffs. $112 billion worth will still take place on September 1 (which means that on September 1, $362 billion total worth, including the newly imposed $112 billion, of Chinese products will face a tariff), but the additional, not yet imposed, $160 billion will not take effect until December 15. Trump and his advisors Peter Navarro, Wilbur Ross and Larry Kudlow said that the tariffs were postponed to avoid harming American consumers during the Christmas shopping season.

August 23: Chinese Ministry of Finance announced new rounds of retaliative tariffs on $75 billion worth of U.S. goods, effective beginning September 1.

August 23: Trump tweeted that he "hereby ordered" American companies to "immediately start looking for an alternative to China". According to an article in The New York Times, Trump's aides said that no order had been drawn up nor was it clear one would be. In a tweet on the following day, Trump said that he had the authority to make good on his threat, citing the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977. Furthermore, tariffs are to be raised from 25% to 30% on the existing $250 billion worth of Chinese goods beginning on October 1, 2019, and from 10% to 15% on the remaining $300 billion worth of goods beginning on December 15, 2019.

August 26: At the G7 summit, Trump stated, "China called last night our top trade people and said 'let's get back to the table' so we will be getting back to the table and I think they want to do something. They have been hurt very badly but they understand this is the right thing to do and I have great respect for it." Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said he was unaware of such a call and Trump aides later said the call didn't occur but the president was trying to project optimism.

September 1: New USA and Chinese tariffs previously announced went into effect at 12:01 pm EST. China imposed 5% to 10% tariffs on one-third of the 5,078 goods it imports from America, with tariffs on the remainder scheduled for December 15. The United States imposed new 15% tariffs on about $112 billion of Chinese imports, such that more than two-thirds of consumer goods imported from China were then subject to tariffs.

September 4: The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and Chinese state media confirmed that deputy-level meetings in mid-September would lead to ministerial-level talks in coming weeks. At the same time, the United States Department of Commerce issued preliminary antidumping duty determinations on fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico. Furthermore, China was found liable for dumping up to 141.38% of fabricated structural steel into the United States and thereby prompted the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collect cash deposits in the same rate, as instructed by the Commerce Department.

September 6: The People's Bank of China announces a 0.5 percent reduction in its reserve requirement ratio in response to the slowing of China's economic growth rates caused by the trade war.

September 11: After China announced it was exempting 16 American product types from tariffs for one year, Trump announced he would delay until October 15 a tariff increase on Chinese goods previously scheduled for October 1. Trump asserted he granted the delay at the request of Chinese vice premier Liu He.

September 12: Bloomberg News and reported that Trump advisors were increasingly concerned that the trade war was weakening the American economy going into the 2020 election campaign and were discussing ways to reach a limited interim deal. The Wall Street Journal reported China was seeking to narrow the scope of negotiations to place national security matters on a separate track from trade issues.

September 26: The Wall Street Journal reported that Chinese retaliatory tariffs on lumber and wood products had caused hardwood lumber exports to China to fall 40% during 2019, resulting in American lumber mills slashing employment. A USDA spokesperson said the organization had provided the industry $5 million in aid through its Agricultural Trade Promotion Program.

October 7: Citing human rights issues, the United States Department of Commerce puts 20 Chinese public security bureaus and eight high tech companies, such as HikVision, SenseTime and Megvii, on the Export Administration Regulations Entity List. Like Huawei, which was sanctioned on an identical blueprint for national security reasons, the entities will need U.S. government approval before they can purchase components from U.S. companies.

October 11: Trump announced that the United States and China had reached a tentative agreement for the "first phase" of a trade deal, with China agreeing to buy up to $50 billion in American farm products, and to accept more American financial services in their market, with the United States agreeing to suspend new tariffs scheduled for October 15. The deal was expected to be finalized in coming weeks. At the same time, Chinese announcements did not express the same confidence, though a few days later the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that the two sides had the same understanding and had reached an agreement.

October 17: Official figures from China showed its third quarter GDP growth at its slowest in almost 30 years.

December 31: The Wall Street Journal reported that the language of the phase one deal was expected to be released after the January 15 signing, and that Lighthizer said some details would be classified.

January 3: Reuters reported that in December 2019 the American manufacturing sector fell into its deepest slump in over a decade, attributing the decline to the U.S.-China trade war.

January 15: U.S. President Donald Trump and China's Vice Premier Liu He signed the US-China Phase One trade deal in Washington DC. The "Economic and Trade Agreement between the United States of America and the People's Republic of China" is set to take effect from February 14, 2020 and focuses on intellectual property rights (Chapter 1), technology transfer (Chapter 2), food and agricultural products (Chapter 3), financial services (Chapter 4), exchange rate matters and transparency (Chapter 5), and expanding trade (Chapter 6), with reference also being made to bilateral evaluation and dispute resolution procedures in Chapter 7. The agreement allows for a party to request additional consultation in the event of a "natural disaster or other unforeseeable event." Unlike other trade agreements, the US-China Phase One agreement did not rely on arbitration through an intergovernmental organization like the World Trade Organization, but rather through a bilateral mechanism.

January 17: Official figures from China showed its 2019 economic growth rate falling amid the trade war to a 30-year low.

February 5: Data from the Commerce Department of the United States showed the country's trade deficit falling amid the trade war for the first time in 6 years.

February 17: China grants tariff exemptions on 696 US goods to support purchases.

May 12: The Chinese government announced exemptions for tariffs on 79 additional US goods.

May 14: The Chinese government announced that it would permit imports of barley and blueberries from the United States.

As of June, China had risen to become the United States' top trading partner again, amid the global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the countries were not on track to meet the targets from the trade deal, which would have been a challenge even under strong economic conditions, according to Chad Brown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics and Chenjun Pan of Rabobank. The economic damage and barriers to trade caused by the pandemic made those targets even harder to reach.

September 15: A three-person WTO panel found that the Trump administration tariffs violated global trade rules because they had been applied only to China and they exceeded the maximum rates the US had agreed to, without adequate explanation. Lighthizer responded that the finding showed "the WTO is completely inadequate to stop China's harmful technology practices."

September 26: The US Commerce Department imposed restrictions on China's largest chip maker, Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC), determining that an "unacceptable risk" equipment supplied to SMIC could potentially be used for military purposes. Under the restrictions, the suppliers were barred from exporting the chip without a license.

November 8: President Donald Trump signed an executive order prohibiting Americans from investing in shares of companies with ties to the Chinese military. New transactions would be barred from 11 January 2021, while investors that already held such stocks would have until November 2021 to divest them. On 6 January 2021, the New York Stock Exchange announced that it would delist stocks related to China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom. Index provider MSCI also announced it would stop including China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom in its benchmarks.

By the end of 2020, China and the U.S. had achieved only 58% of targets for U.S. exports to China under the phase one trade agreement. This was seen as a sign that the original targets were unrealistic. The U.S.-based Peterson Institute for International Economics said China had "failed spectacularly" to meet its import targets and "much of the deal was a failure."

January 13: The Trump administration banned cotton and tomato products originating in Xinjiang, including products manufactured outside of China but using cotton and tomatoes from Xinjiang, over forced labor allegations.

January 20: Trump left office and Joe Biden was inaugurated as president of the United States. Biden said that he did not have immediate plans to remove the tariffs and planned to review the phase one trade deal and discuss the matter with allies first.

January 20: China imposed sanctions against outgoing US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former secretary of health and human services Alex Azar, former under secretary of state Keith J. Krach, outgoing US ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft, and 24 other former Trump officials. Biden's National Security Council called the sanctions "unproductive and cynical."

February 22: China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi called for US President Joe Biden to lift the multiple restrictions imposed by Trump. During a Foreign Ministry forum on US-China relations, he urged the Biden administration to lift the sanctions on trade and people-to-people contact, while asking it to stop interfering in China's internal affairs.

In May and June 2021, discussions continued between high-level officials, including Liu He and Wang Wentao from China and Katherine Tai, Janet Yellen, and Gina Raimondo from the United States. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce described the talks as candid, productive, and pragmatic, while Tai and Yellen said they looked forward to further dialogue.

In April 2018, China announced that it would eliminate laws that required global automakers and shipbuilders to work through state-owned partners. President of China and General Secretary Xi Jinping reiterated those pledges, affirming a desire to increase imports, lower foreign-ownership limits on manufacturing and expand protection to intellectual property, all central issues in Trump's complaints about their trade imbalance. Trump thanked Xi for his "kind words on tariffs and automobile barriers" and "his enlightenment" on intellectual property and technology transfers. "We will make great progress together!" the president added.

By early July 2018, there were negative and positive results already showing up in the economy as a result of the tariffs, as a number of industries showed employment growth while others were planning on layoffs. Regional commentators noted that consumer products were the most likely to be affected by the tariffs. A timeline of when costs would rise was uncertain as companies had to figure out if they could sustain a tariff hike without passing on the costs to consumers.

American farmers have been particularly severely affected by China's retaliatory trade actions. In response, the Trump administration's aid relief for the difficulties faced by the farmers came in the form of cash payments, securing additional trade deals and modifying environmental regulations to benefit corn farmers. According to the American Farm Bureau, agricultural exports from the US to China decreased from $24 billion in 2014 to $9.1 billion in 2018, including decreases in sales of pork, soybeans, and wheat. Farm bankruptcies have increased, and agricultural equipment manufacturer Deere & Company cut its profit forecast twice between January and August 2019. An August 2019 USDA report showed that as American wheat exports to China dropped, Canadian wheat exports to China rose from 32% to more than 60%. Farm equipment manufacturers were negatively affected by the reluctance of farmers to invest in new equipment, with sales dropping significantly during the first quarter of 2019. Yet despite the negative effects, polls in July 2019 showed that most farmers continued to support Trump, as 78% of them said they believed the trade war will ultimately benefit U.S. agriculture. The Government Accountability Office announced in February 2020 that it would examine the program, amid reports that aid was being improperly distributed.

According to a study by the National Retail Federation of the United States, a 25% tariff on Chinese furniture alone would cost US consumers an additional $4.6 billion in annual payments.

Economic growth has slowed worldwide amid the trade war. The International Monetary Fund's World Economic Outlook report released in April 2019 lowered the global economic growth forecast for 2019 from 3.6% expected in 2018 to 3.3%, and said that economic and trade frictions may further curb global economic growth and continue weaken the investment. According to Capital Economics, China's economic growth has slowed as a result of the trade war, though overall the Chinese economy "has held up well", and China's share of global exports has increased.[better source needed ] U.S. economic growth has also slowed.

Analysis by Goldman Sachs in May 2019 found that the consumer price index for nine categories of tariffed goods had increased dramatically, compared to a declining CPI for all other core goods.

In August 2019, Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro asserted tariffs were not hurting Americans. Politifact rated Navarro's assertion "Pants on Fire."

Surveys of consumer sentiment and small business confidence showed sharp declines in August 2019 on uncertainty caused by the trade war. The closely followed Purchasing Managers' Index for manufacturing from the Institute for Supply Management showed contraction in August, for the first time since January 2016; the ISM quoted several executives expressing anxiety about the continuing trade war, citing shrinking export orders and the challenges of shifting their supply chains out of China. The IHS Markit manufacturing purchasing managers' index also showed contraction in August, for the first time since September 2009. The day the ISM report was released, Trump tweeted, "China's Supply Chain will crumble and businesses, jobs and money will be gone!"

By September 2019, American manufacturers were reducing their capital investments and delaying hiring due to uncertainty caused by the trade war.

A November 2019 article in the Financial Times said that since August 2019 the trade war hit US manufacturers harder than China's.[needs update ]

In December 2019, the South China Morning Post reported that, due to the trade war and the Chinese government's crackdown on shadow banking, Chinese manufacturing investments were expanding at the lowest rate since records began.

American importers were allowed to apply for exclusions from the tariffs. The Wall Street Journal reported in February 2020 that the USTR was granting fewer tariff waivers to American firms, down from 35% of requests for the first two tranches of tariffs in 2018 to 3% for the third tranche in 2019. The mechanism for applying for exclusions expired in 2020.

Analysis published by The Wall Street Journal in October 2020 found the trade war did not achieve the primary objective of reviving American manufacturing, nor did it result in the reshoring of factory production. Though the trade war led to higher employment in certain industries, tariffs led to a net loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs. The trade war reduced the United States' trade deficit with China in 2019, but this trend reversed itself in 2020, with the trade deficit increasing back to its pre-trade war level, while the United States' overall trade deficit has increased.

Despite the United States trade deficit with China declining sharply from the record high in 2018, during the Trump presidency the overall deficit increased to the highest level since 2008, as American businesses shifted their imports to other countries to avoid the Trump tariffs. The deficit in goods increased 21% from 2016, to a record high. American exports - notably farm goods - were also weakened by retaliatory actions from China, the European Union and other countries.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 724 points, or 2.9%, after the tariffs were announced due to concerns over a trade war. Corporations that traded with China, such as Caterpillar Inc.and Boeing, suffered large losses in their stock price.

On December 4, 2018, the Dow Jones Industrial Average logged its worst day in nearly a month as it declined nearly 600 points, to which some argue is in part due to the trade war. On December 26, the Dow Jones recorded a rise of 1000 points after, according to Reuters, the publication of a report that documented strong holiday sales, although the major indexes were still down more than 10% through the month of December 2018 amid the trade war.

On August 14, 2019, the Dow dropped 800 points, partly caused by increasing trade tensions between the U.S. and China. Nine days later, on August 23, the Dow dropped 623 points on the day that Trump informally ordered American companies to immediately seek alternatives to doing business in China. By the end of 2019, stock markets reached record highs, having risen due to the agreement between the United States and China to sign the first phase of a trade deal.

Analysts speculated that the trade war could affect the 2020 United States presidential election, as tariffs have negatively affected farmers, an important constituency for Trump. Analysts also speculated on how the trade war affected Xi Jinping in relation to the domestic pressures that he faced.

In 2021, following the transition to the Biden administration, the Financial Times reported that "rushing to remove the tariffs could prove risky" for the Democrats in the 2022 United States elections.

Globally, foreign direct investment has slowed. The trade war has hurt the European economy, particularly Germany, even though trade relations between Germany and China and between Germany and the U.S. remain good. Germany and the EU have had high levels of trade with China, and the German government and public want to maintain these trade ties. The Canadian economy has seen negative effects as well. Like the U.S., Britain, Germany, Japan, and South Korea were all showing "a weak manufacturing performance" as of 2019. Several Asian governments have instituted stimulus measures to address damage from the trade war, though economists said this may not be effective.

A trade group predicted that demand for semiconductor devices would decline by 12 per cent, as a direct result of the trade war.

Some countries have benefited economically from the trade war, at least in some sectors, due to increasing exports to the United States and China to fill the gaps left by decreasing trade between these two economies. Beneficiaries include Vietnam, Chile, India, Malaysia, and Argentina. Vietnam is the biggest beneficiary, with technology companies moving manufacturing there. South Korea has also benefited from increased electronics exports, Malaysia from semiconductor exports, Mexico from motor vehicles, and Brazil from soybeans. Trade diversion effects have also had an impact on countries in East and Southeast Asia with Taiwan getting the largest boost. However, US-ASEAN Business Council CEO Alex Feldman warned that even these countries may not benefit long-term, saying that "It's in everyone's interest to see this spat get resolved and go back to normal trade relations between the US and China." Several Taiwanese companies have been expanding production domestically, including Quanta Computer, Sercomm and Wistron, creating over 21,000 jobs. This investment led to a significant strengthening of the New Taiwan Dollar which had not been expected pre-Trade War. Nintendo has reportedly moved some Nintendo Switch production from China to Southeast Asia.

The trade war has indirectly caused some companies to go bankrupt. One of them, Taiwanese LCD panel manufacturer Chunghwa Picture Tubes (CPT), went bankrupt as a result of an excess supply of panels and a subsequent collapse in prices, which was aided by vulnerability to the trade war (caused by overexpansion in China), a slowing Taiwanese and global economy and a slowdown in the electronics sector.

Mainland Chinese politicians and economists have been divided over the trade war. An August 2019 article in NPR said that while some in the PRC leadership argued for a quick resolution to the trade war in order to save China's economy, others said that the country should push back against the United States and avoid an agreement at all costs.

In August 2018, Hong Kong-based academic Willy Lam said that the trade war had galvanized all the previous misgivings which different countries in the West had toward China and undermined Chinese leader Xi Jinping's authority. Zhang Baohui, a political science professor at Lingnan University in Hong Kong, similarly said that the trade war had been effective in challenging the myth of Chinese invincibility, saying that the tariffs "really hurt China at a very bad time, when the economy is experiencing serious trouble."

A December 2018 journal article published by two Chinese academics said that in the worst-case scenario of the trade war, China would suffer a 1.1% decrease in employment and a 1% GDP loss, which they said were not negligible, but manageable for China. Another paper published in February 2018 by Chinese academics similarly concluded that whereas the United States would experience large social welfare losses as a result of the trade war, China may lose or gain slightly depending on the effect of trade war on the U.S.-China trade balance.

Domestic reporting on the trade war is censored in China. While news outlets are permitted to report on the conflict, their coverage is subject to restrictions; the South China Morning Post said that employees for Chinese media were told not to "over-report" the trade war while an article in The New York Times said that state news outlets had sought to promote the official line, with the authorities restricting the use of the phrase "trade war." Social media posts about the conflict are subject to censorship as well.

The trade war is a common subject on Chinese social media, with one popular Internet meme referencing Thanos, a villain from Marvel Comics and the Marvel Cinematic Universe who wipes out half of all life in the universe using the Infinity Gauntlet, joking that Trump will similarly wipe out half of China's investors.

In mid-2021, Taoran Notes, a social media account associated with the state-run Economic Daily, advised Chinese decision-makers to remain calm and recommended that both sides develop a deeper understanding of each other's perspectives. Taoran Notes said that the two countries countries had chosen "the path of cooperation that seeks common ground while reserving differences".

People's Daily, the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, has stated that China will be able to withstand the trade war, and that Trump's policies are affecting American consumers.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer praised President Trump's higher tariffs against China's alleged taking advantage of the U.S. and said "Democrats, Republicans, Americans of every political ideology, every region in the country should support these actions." Other Democratic senators who supported Trump's actions include Bob Menendez, Sherrod Brown and Ron Wyden Bipartisan support from the House of Representatives for Trump's actions came from Nancy Pelosi. Brad Sherman, Kevin Brady, and Ted Yoho. Democratic representative Tim Ryan, who has a lifetime 98 percent rating from the AFL-CIO, also supported the Trump tariffs saying, "What China has been doing is bullshit. They're cheating, they're subsidizing their product." Senator Marco Rubio has also supported the tariffs, which he referred to as a "theft tax".

Other Republican senators have given more divided statements. Mitch McConnell said that "nobody wins a trade war" but that there was hope the tactics would "get us into a better position, vis-à-vis China". John Cornyn said, "If this is what it takes to get a good deal, I think people will hang in there, but at some point we've got to get it resolved. If this goes on for a long time, everybody realizes it's playing with a live hand grenade." Joni Ernst said in May 2019 that the "tariffs are hurtful" to farmers, but that they "do want us to find a path forward with China" and said, "We hope that we can get a deal soon".

The Associated Press reported in 2018 that "Dave Warner, a spokesman for the National Pork Producers Council, said pork producers have already seen the value of their pigs fall after a previous Chinese tariff. Warner said pig producers will likely feel the effect of the new tariff, though it's not yet clear exactly how."

The mayors of Davenport and St. Gabriel, which represented towns with a heavy reliance on the farming sector, expressed their concerns that the trade war would have on their cities.

In August 2019, Roger Johnson of the National Farmers Union - representing about 200,000 family farmers, ranchers and fishers - stated that the trade war was creating problems for American farmers, specifically highlighting the fall in soybean exports from the U.S. to China.[better source needed ] In the same month, the American Farm Bureau Federation - representing large agribusiness - said that the announcement of new tariffs "signals more trouble for American agriculture."

More than 3,500 American businesses sued the Trump administration over the tariffs.

Over 600 companies and trade associations, including manufacturers, retailers, and tech companies, wrote to Trump in mid-2019 to ask him to remove tariffs and end the trade war, saying that increased tariffs would have "a significant, negative, and long-term impact on American businesses, farmers, families, and the US economy".

Americans for Free Trade, a coalition of over 160 business organizations, wrote a letter to Trump in August 2019 requesting that he postpone all tariff rate increases on Chinese goods, citing concerns about cost increases for U.S. manufacturers and farmers. The coalition includes the National Retail Federation, the Consumer Technology Association, Association of Equipment Manufacturers, the Toy Association and American Petroleum Institute, among others.

In September 2019, Matthew Shay, president and CEO of the National Retail Federation, said that the trade war had "gone on far too long" and had harmful effects on American businesses and consumers. He urged the Trump administration to end the trade war and find an agreement to remove all the tariffs.

Hun Quach, vice president of international trade for the Retail Industry Leaders Association has claimed that the tariffs will impact American family budgets by raising the prices of everyday items.

The CEOs of American steelmakers Nucor Corp, United States Steel Corp, ArcelorMittal SA and Commercial Metals Co have all supported Trump's steel tariffs against China as has the United Steelworkers Union. Scott Paul, president of the associated Alliance for American Manufacturing, has also supported tariffs, and opposed proposals to reverse them in light of the coronavirus pandemic. In 2019, he criticized the stagnation of trade talks saying "Trump would have ripped any Democrat for that outcome".

James Hoffa Jr., president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, has been a proponent of U.S. tariffs against China as has Richard Trumka, president of AFL-CIO.

The vice president of the National Marine Manufacturers Association criticized the tariffs, saying they were "hurting American manufacturers."

According to articles in Politifact, most mainstream economists said that "consumers are the primary victims of tariffs" and most economists said that they carry "more risks than benefits". Nearly all economists who responded to surveys conducted by the Associated Press and Reuters said that Trump's tariffs would do more harm than good to the economy of the United States, and some economists advocated for alternate means for the United States to address its trade deficit with China.

James Andrew Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said that what the United States needed from China was a commitment to observes the rules and norms of international trade and to extend reciprocal treatment to U.S. companies in China.

In an April 2018 article in , Harry G. Broadman, a former U.S. trade negotiator, said that while he agreed with the Trump administration's basic position that the Chinese did not abide by fair, transparent and market-based rules for global trade, he disagreed with its means of unilaterally employing tariffs and said that the administration should instead pursue a coalition-based approach.

In a November 2018 testimony before the Senate Finance Committee, Jennifer Hillman, a professor of practice at Georgetown University Law School, said that United States "ought to be bringing a big and bold case, based on a coalition of countries working together to take on China."

Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics said that while it made sense for other countries to get more involved in confronting China, the problem was that they didn't know how serious Trump was on reforming the larger, systemic issues.

Economists at financial firm Morgan Stanley expressed uncertainty about how the trade war would end, but warned in June 2019 that it could lead to a recession.

Economist Paul Krugman said in September 2020 that if Democratic candidate Joe Biden won the U.S. presidential election, he should maintain a tough stance against China, but focus more on industrial policy than trade tariffs.

An August 2019 Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll found that 67% of registered voters wanted the U.S. to confront Beijing over its trade policies despite the fact that 74% said American consumers were shouldering most of the burden of tariffs. Mark Penn, the co-director of the Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll, said the poll showed strong support amongst the American public for Trump's trade policies against China, saying, "They realize that the tariffs may have negative impacts on jobs and prices, but they believe the fight here is the right one."

Tariffs on medical supplies have become politically complicated due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Wall Street Journal, citing Trade Data Monitor to show that China is the leading source of many key medical supplies, raised concerns that US tariffs on imports from China threaten imports of medical supplies into the United States.

A March 2019 Reuters article said that the European Union shared many of the Trump administration's same complaints with regards to China's technology transfer policies and market access constraints and also reported that European diplomats and officials acknowledged support for Trump's goals, even if they disagreed with his tactics.

At the 45th G7 summit, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson said, "We don't like tariffs on the whole." An article in ABC said that U.S. allies warned Trump during the summit about his trade war with China, but that Trump said he wasn't facing any pressure from his allies over the trade war. European Council President Donald Tusk said the trade war risked causing a global recession.

The Chilean vice minister for trade, Rodrigo Yanez, told CNBC that "It's very important for Chile that a trade deal between the U.S. and China is signed soon".

In the wake of the 2020 Galwan Valley skirmish, Indian commentators made references to the US-China trade war as part of their overall analysis of the effect that the skirmish would have on the future relations between India and China.

Albuquerque, José Luiz, Antonio MArcelo Jackson Ferreira da Silva, and José Medeiros da Silva. "The China-US Trade War." Revista do Fórum Internacional de Ideias 9.1 (2019): 11+ online, a Brazilian perspective

Boucher, Jean-Christophe, and Cameron G. Thies. "'I Am a Tariff Man': The Power of Populist Foreign Policy Rhetoric under President Trump." Journal of Politics 81.2 (2019): 712-722.

Chong, Terence Tai Leung, and Xiaoyang Li. "Understanding the China-US trade war: causes, economic impact, and the worst-case scenario." Economic and Political Studies 7.2 (2019): 185-202. online, a historical perspective

Crowley, Meredith A. (ed.), Trade War: The Clash of Economic Systems Endangering Global Prosperity (CEPR Press, 2019).

Fenby, Jonathan, and Trey McArver. The Eagle and the Dragon: Donald Trump, Xi Jinping and the Fate of US/China Relations (2019)

Foot, Rosemary, and Amy King. "Assessing the deterioration in China-US relations: US governmental perspectives on the economic-security nexus." China International Strategy Review (2019): 1-12. online

Lau, Lawrence J. The China-U.S. Trade War and Future Economic Relations (Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press, 2019) online, a Hong Kong perspective

Qiu, Larry D., Chaoqun Zhan, and Xing Wei. "An analysis of the China-US trade war through the lens of the trade literature." Economic and Political Studies 7.2 (2019): 148-168.

Qiu, Larry D., and Xing Wei. "China-US trade: implications on conflicts." China Economic Journal (2019): 1-20.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
China-United States trade war - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The China-United States trade war ( Chinese: ; pinyin: Zhōngměi Màoyìzhàn ) is an ongoing economic conflict between China and the United States. U.S. President Donald Trump in January 2018 began setting tariffs and other trade barriers on China with the goal of forcing it to make changes to what the U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Zongyuan Zoe Liu, Council on Foreign Relations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Analysis: Trump’s truce with China on tariffs comes at a cost to U.S. credibility

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
U.S.-China trade talks in Geneva resulted in a temporary slash of tariff rates, but the ripple effect of this tit-for-tat escalation won’t disappear anytime soon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
US TikTok ban: Which other countries have banned the app? | Context

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Trump has signed an order delaying the ban of TikTok by 75 days

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kaspersky industrial threat report for Q1 2025

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kaspersky ICS CERT shares trends and statistics on industrial threats in Q1 2025.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Home Computer and Mobile Security Software | Kaspersky Malaysia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kaspersky Offers Multiple Levels of Protection for Your Home Computer & Mobile Devices to Keep You Safe From All Malware, Viruses and Online Threats. Secure Your Devices With Our Award-Winning Security Products.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
- South-east Asian nations should look at ways to further integrate their supply chains regionally and around the world to reap the benefits of economies of scale and gain access to larger markets, said Thailand's Foreign Minister Maris Sangiampongsa.

Some countries in the region are already working together to produce more complex goods such as semiconductors, and Asean officials do see the potential that comes from being part of the global supply chain, Mr Maris said in an interview in Kuala Lumpur with Bloomberg TV's Avril Hong.

"That is the key that leads to the integration, more and more deepening of our relationships and integration of our members of Asean," Mr Maris said. "We have to share the advantage in the manufacturing. That means we share the opportunities for supply chains for the global market."

Mr Maris was responding to a question on concerns about an influx of cheap imports into Thailand.

A survey of chief executives of Thai companies released in April showed that almost 71 per cent of the participants were worried about cheap Chinese goods flooding Thai markets, leading to lower use of production facilities or more factory closures.

"When there's a big volume of products from China, it also helps the Thai economy because people can buy things cheaper than produced in Thailand," he said.

"What I am trying to say is, we have to work and to find, to be able to see the advantage of working together with Asean, with China to fulfil the global supply chain."

China's economic ties with South-east Asia have soared in recent years, with free-trade deals and efforts to avoid US tariffs targeting Beijing driving trade and investment from Chinese companies and other multinationals into Asean.

Vietnam was the largest recipient of manufacturing investment from China in 2024, followed by Indonesia, according to US research company Rhodium Group, with both seeing around US$3 billion (S$3.9 billion) in newly announced Chinese manufacturing projects.

Mr Maris spoke on May 25 after meeting with Asean foreign ministers who gathered ahead of the leaders summit this week.

Key areas of focus are complexities surrounding the global trade war and navigating tense relations between superpowers.

The US has indicated it will not negotiate with Asean as a bloc and will pursue bilateral discussions.

Trade-reliant Asean countries are in a rush to negotiate with the US to lower imposed tariff rates, ranging from 10 per cent to 49 per cent.

Many have already pledged to increase purchases of a swathe of US goods to strengthen their case for lower tariffs.

The urgency is because Asia, which manufactures most of the world's goods, is poised to be among the hardest hit in the global trade war.

Countries must be able to work on security and economic concerns with either superpower as selecting sides on a per-issue basis is not feasible, Mr Maris said.

China was Asean's top trading partner in 2024, with total trade worth US$770 billion.

Thailand has expressed its readiness to hold talks with the US - its biggest export market in 2024 - after submitting a proposal detailing how it will boost imports of American goods and investments in the US, and strengthen bilateral cooperation.

The country expects to reduce its trade surplus with the US by as much as US$15 billion a year - from about US$45 billion in 2024 - with its recent initiatives to prevent the misuse of origin rules for exports.

The US tariffs also came after Thailand joined Brics - a group of major emerging economies in which China is a member but not the US - as a partner country, which should help it hedge against uncertainties with pathways into other global markets.

Mr Maris said Thailand is seeking a full membership but cannot say when that will happen. BLOOMBERG

Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Asean must keep joining global supply chains, Thai minister says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Asean officials see the potential that comes from being part of the global supply chain, he said. Read more at straitstimes.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
As US tariff threat looms, China ups ante with push for new Asean free-trade deal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In a dig at Washington, Beijing warns against tariffs as it wraps up talks with region that could face some of the world’s steepest duties.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Access error: the page you are trying to access is unavailable. Please wait a moment and try again.

# data[].attributes.body
Liyana Syafiqah Binti Mohd Salleh

AM2211012114

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AM Green, Port of Rotterdam eye green energy supply chain between India and Europe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
India’s green hydrogen and ammonia producer AM Green and the Dutch Port of Rotterdam Authority have signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to explore the establishment of a green energy supply chain between India and Northwestern Europe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Coggle is a collaborative mind-mapping tool that helps you make sense of complex things. Create unlimited mind maps and easily share them with friends and colleagues.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GROUP 4_BUS4253 SEC04_METAL GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Coffee beans Roasted_coffee_beans - Coggle Diagram

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Anthony Poole Partner, Human Capital, Europe, the Middle East and Africa

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Human Resources Trends to Watch in 2025

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stay ahead of fast-moving HR trends. Learn what your organization can do to proactively manage workforce transformation, make the most of your total rewards budget and foster a healthier, more productive workforce. Read more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
HR might not always get to pick the company's global structure, but they're definitely the ones dealing with the day-to-day impact. Whether it's a centralized, decentralized, or matrix structure, it's up to HR to turn these frameworks into something that works for the people. This isn't about accepting the status quo; it's about HR stepping in to ensure that these structures empower rather than hinder.

Centralized Organizational Structure: Keeping Innovation Alive

The "HQ Knows Best" model keeps things consistent and aligned, but it can make local teams feel stuck and powerless. That's where HR comes in to shake things up. Instead of letting creativity die in the approval queue, HR can pave the way for fresh ideas. Take a cue from Adobe's "Kickbox" program -they gave employees a red box filled with resources, a prepaid card, and the green light to innovate without jumping through hoops. HR can support similar programs that let teams explore new ideas while staying within strategic guardrails. The goal? Find those sweet spots where local teams can innovate without derailing the overall strategy. The key question for HR is, "How do we give people room to breathe while keeping everything on track?"

Decentralized Structure: Managing Freedom Without Losing Focus

In a decentralized model, local teams get more say in how they operate, which can be great for morale and quick responses. But without some coordination, things can get messy fast. McDonald's found a smart balance-they allow regional teams to tweak menus to local tastes while ensuring the core brand remains rock solid. HR's role here is to create those links between teams, set clear brand guidelines, and share best practices so everyone's on the same page. It's less about control and more about connection. HR should be thinking, "How do we keep creativity alive while ensuring we're all telling the same story?"

Matrix Structure: Navigating Complexity and Getting Results

The matrix structure promises both global alignment and local flexibility. It's a great way to mix perspectives and get the best of both worlds-if you manage it right. GE used a matrix setup to boost collaboration between product lines and regions, sparking some innovative thinking. But the double reporting lines? That can get confusing fast. HR can clear the fog by defining who's responsible for what, setting clear communication channels, and helping teams manage those tricky overlapping priorities. The aim isn't to add more rules; it's to make things clearer and cut down on internal turf wars. HR should ask, "How do we keep things collaborative without getting bogged down in the politics?"

Balancing Autonomy and Integration: Where HR Adds Real Value

Finding the right balance between autonomy and control isn't a one-time thing-it's an ongoing dance. Too much freedom, and you've got chaos; too much control, and innovation grinds to a halt. HR's role is to keep an eye on this balance and adjust when needed. Always ask, "Is our structure helping people thrive, or is it getting in their way?" When the company is breaking into new markets, HR should ensure the company's core values stay intact, while also allowing teams the freedom to adapt.

Conclusion: Driving Positive Change Through HR Leadership

HR isn't just about making structures work-it's about making them better for everyone. CHROs may not choose the organizational setup, but they can shape how it feels and functions. It's about challenging the status quo, asking the right questions, and empowering teams to think differently. By finding those who push boundaries and fostering a culture of innovation, HR leaders turn any structure into a platform for growth, engagement, and success. The focus should always be, "How can we make this better?" and using that mindset to drive continuous improvement and positive change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Human Resources Should Care About Global Organizational Structures

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Whether it's a centralized, decentralized, or matrix structure, it's up to HR to turn these frameworks into something that works for the organization's employees.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Using virtual reality to train workers to work with robots

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Virtual reality could provide workers with an immersive digital environment to practice complex tasks, according to new UGA research.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colorful Illustrative Mind Map Brainstorm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PODCAST ACTIVITY - GROUP 5 - BUS4253 SEC 03

# data[].attributes.body
TOPIC 8 : LEADERSHIP AND EMPLOYEE BEHAVIOR IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1 GROUP MUHAMMAD DANIEL PODCAST PRACTICE.mp4

# data[].attributes.body
GROUP AHMAD IRSYAD BIN AHMAD NAZIR

# data[].attributes.body
Podcast Practice