Trade Tensions Escalate as Trump’s Tariffs on China Hit 104%

The trade war between the U.S. and China has reached new heights, with President Trump implementing a sweeping set of tariffs that now total 104% on Chinese goods. Beijing has fired back with fierce rhetoric, warning it will fight to the end, signaling that neither side is ready to back down.

  • This latest escalation underscores the widening economic rift between the world’s two largest economies.
  • Despite Trump's broader campaign against multiple trading partners, China remains at the core of his trade crusade, reflecting deep-rooted concerns over persistent trade imbalances.
  • Over the past two decades, China’s growing trade surplus with the U.S. has fueled accusations of job losses and industry decline in America—claims Trump has repeatedly spotlighted.

With the two countries digging in, the prospect of a prolonged economic standoff looms large, threatening to fracture global supply chains and stall international growth.

Tit-for-Tat Tariff Tactics

The White House's latest move includes an additional 50% tariff threat, piling on top of earlier duties and those still in place from the Biden administration. Combined, these measures push the effective average tariff rate on Chinese goods to an eye-popping 125%.

  • China responded swiftly, not only with its own tariffs—like a 34% blanket rate on U.S. imports—but also by restricting access to rare-earth minerals and allowing its currency to weaken, softening the blow of American tariffs on Chinese exports.
  • In response, state-owned investment firms in China stepped in to stabilize markets, reflecting concerns that rising economic tensions could rattle investor confidence.
  • Both sides view the stakes as existential. Trump sees China's dominance in global trade as evidence of a rigged system that has disadvantaged American workers. Meanwhile, Beijing views the U.S. campaign as a deliberate attempt to halt its rise as a global economic powerhouse.

Despite occasional signs that Trump might reverse course in search of a deal, the current trajectory points toward a costly and prolonged conflict.

Broadening the Battlefront

While China remains the central focus, Trump has expanded his trade offensive to traditional allies like the EU, Japan, Mexico, and Canada, accusing them of benefiting from unbalanced trade terms.

  • Third-party countries like Vietnam, Mexico, and Cambodia—previously beneficiaries of diverted trade—are now facing scrutiny as Washington aims to prevent tariff evasion via rerouted supply chains.
  • However, none face tariffs as steep as China. Imports from China—valued at roughly $400 billion in 2024—are now the most heavily targeted.
  • A recent U.S. trade report highlights this singular focus. While China’s trade practices took up nearly 50 pages, other major partners like Canada and Mexico only warranted a handful.

Concerns include technology transfers, food safety rules, counterfeit goods, and import quotas, revealing the deep structural disagreements at play.

A Divided View on Global Trade

Supporters of the current global manufacturing system argue that it benefits consumers with low-cost goods while allowing the U.S. to focus on higher-value sectors like tech and services. But critics, including some of Trump’s closest advisers such as Peter Navarro, argue that foreign trade surpluses are often built on unfair practices, including subsidies, currency manipulation, and import restrictions.

  • Still, most economists view these imbalances through a different lens. Persistent surpluses in countries like China are seen as a result of high savings and low consumption, while deficits in the U.S. reflect high spending and relatively low savings, often propped up by borrowing from overseas.
  • Resolving these imbalances will take more than tariffs. Fundamental economic shifts are needed on both sides. China has made vague pledges to increase domestic consumption, but it remains unclear whether these are short-term fixes or part of a deeper strategy to move away from its dependence on exports and infrastructure investment.

On the U.S. side, Trump’s plans to reduce the deficit by curbing imports could be undercut by his own tax cuts and efforts to attract foreign capital, which may further widen the deficit rather than shrink it.

Disclaimer

Please note that Benchmark does not produce investment advice in any form. Our articles are not research reports and are not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decision. All investments involve risk and the past performance of a security or financial product does not guarantee future returns. Investors have to conduct their own research before conducting any transaction. There is always the risk of losing parts or all of your money when you invest in securities or other financial products.

Credits

Photo by Natilyn Hicks Photography / Unsplash.