After this round of talks between China and the U.S. ends, both sides each released their lists of outcomes. The most tangible item on them is: a $30 billion, reciprocal tariff reduction arrangement. The U.S. side also said that the trade truce would be extended to next January. In both sides’ official wording, the term “reciprocal” is used.
$30 billion sounds like a lot, but I’m not planning to figure out what portion it is of the bilateral trade value, because whether the percentage looks good or bad doesn’t change the judgment. What I care about more is the expiration date on the list: next January. Why January—rather than the end of the first quarter, or six months later? This date itself is a piece of information.
From another angle, the value of a truce agreement has never been about how much tax it reduces, but about writing the date of the next showdown onto the paper. Whoever wrote the date, controls the tempo.
As for what this date was calculated against, and over the next six months, who is more likely to break first, I’ll cover that in the comments section.
First, let me ask: Do you think this $30 billion is just an appetizer, or is it everything?
$30 billion sounds like a lot, but I’m not planning to figure out what portion it is of the bilateral trade value, because whether the percentage looks good or bad doesn’t change the judgment. What I care about more is the expiration date on the list: next January. Why January—rather than the end of the first quarter, or six months later? This date itself is a piece of information.
From another angle, the value of a truce agreement has never been about how much tax it reduces, but about writing the date of the next showdown onto the paper. Whoever wrote the date, controls the tempo.
As for what this date was calculated against, and over the next six months, who is more likely to break first, I’ll cover that in the comments section.
First, let me ask: Do you think this $30 billion is just an appetizer, or is it everything?
