President Donald Trump hailed the easing of trade tensions with China as the "biggest deal there is anywhere in the world." But it failed to address some of economic issues at the heart of the bitter dispute, raising questions about whether it was worth nearly two years of bruising tariffs.
In the 94-page text of the phase-one agreement released following a signing ceremony Wednesday, there were several concessions from China that the White House could tout ahead of the election in November. Those included stronger protections for patents and intellectual property, a pledge to increase purchases of American products by $200 billion, and more room for foreign companies to gain access to the financial sector in the state-run economy.
Yet commitments on industrial subsidies and other structural issues the Trump administration has long promised to address were conspicuously absent from the phase-one agreement. The tit-for-tat tariff fight began in early 2017 after a Section 301 investigation found that China was guilty of economic aggression.
Even administration officials have at times offered a less ambitious assessment of the phase-one deal than the president, noting that it was never meant to be comprehensive and pointing to a fresh round of negotiations that is expected to take place soon. CBS in December. "Did we expect it to? No. Absolutely not. It really is a remarkable agreement, but it's not going to solve all the problems.
Taxpayers 1. paying 40-50 M in taxpayer money to farmers 2. have to pay more of their money on tariff products 3. big corps lost 46 M last year because of tariffs so many taxpayers would have lost jobs. Good job Mr. President realDonaldTrump
It was always smoke and mirrors, with a side order of kickbacks for a special few !
Business Business Latest News, Business Business Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: BusinessInsider - 🏆 729. / 51 Read more »
Source: BusinessInsider - 🏆 729. / 51 Read more »
Source: BusinessInsider - 🏆 729. / 51 Read more »
Source: BusinessInsider - 🏆 729. / 51 Read more »
Source: Reuters - 🏆 2. / 97 Read more »