Trade War

Relations between the United States and China are tense, once again, with experts saying that the administration of US President Donald Trump “doesn’t quite know how to deal with China”.

The latest flare-up took place when Beijing, on October 9, expanded its restrictions on the export of rare-earth metals, increasing the number of elements on the list.

China has the largest reserves and the majority of processing facilities of rare-earth metals that are used in a range of daily and critical industries like electric vehicles, smartphones, laptops and defence equipment.

In a first, it also required countries to have a licence to export rare-earth magnets and certain semiconductor materials that contain even trace amounts of minerals sourced from China or produced using Chinese technology.

China’s actions on rare-earths also came after the US expanded its Entity List, a trade restriction list that consists of certain foreign persons, entities or government, further limiting China’s access to the most advanced semiconductor chips, and added levies on China-linked ships both to boost the US shipbuilding industry and loosen China’s hold on the global shipping trade. China retaliated by applying its own charges on US-owned, operated, built or flagged vessels.

“For the US, its actions on chip exports and shipping industry fees were not related to the trade deal with China,” said Vina Nadjibulla, vice president for research and strategy at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.

Since then, the two countries have also been in an “information war”, said Nadjibulla, each blaming the other for holding the world hostage with its policies.

But beyond the rhetoric, the world is seeing China really up its game.

“For the first time, China is doing this extra-terrestrial action that applies to other countries as well [with its amped up export restrictions on rare-earths]. They are prepared to match every US escalation, and have the US back down,” Nadjibulla said. “This is a very different kind of a trade war than we were experiencing even three months ago.”

This was a “power play” by China in the run-up to a planned meeting later this month between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea because “China has decided that the leverage is on their side,” said Dexter Tiff Roberts, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Global China Hub, pointing out that after some initial noise with Trump saying there was no reason to meet Xi any longer, the meeting is back on.

“If you look at the approach of the Trump administration right now, they are all over the place,” said Roberts.

Roberts was referring not only to the multiple tariff threats that the US has issued both on China and on specific industries and the carve-outs that were soon announced on those, but also in its statements on the Trump-Xi meeting, with Trump saying it was not happening, only to reverse that two days later.

“The Trump administration doesn’t quite know how to deal with China,” said Roberts. “They don’t understand that China is willing to accept a lot of pain,” and will not be easily cowed by US threats.

Beijing, on the other hand, has realised that Trump is determined to get his big deal with China and wants his state visit to seal that, maybe because “he feels that is important to his credentials as a big deal maker,” added Roberts, but that he cannot get there without giving more to China.

“China saw that they could push harder in the lead-up to the meeting.”

Wei Liang, a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies who specialises in international trade and Chinese economic foreign policy, agrees.

“Trump has a track record of TACO,” she said, referring to a term coined by a Financial Times columnist in May, which stands for “Trump always chickens out” in reference to his announcing tariffs and then carving out exemptions and pushing out implementation dates.

“He cares more than any other US president [about] stock market reactions, so definitely will be more flexible to making concessions. This is the inconsistency that has been captured by his negotiation partners,” Liang said.

China’s defiant stance also comes at a time of its own political concerns, Liang added.

While the domestic economy is “a black box” with no reliable data available on growth, employment and other criteria, the consensus among China experts is that the country has been hit by the tariffs, economic growth has slowed, and unemployment has ramped up.

As China started its four-day fourth plenary session on Monday where it plans to approve the draft of its next five-year national economic and social development plan, Xi can use the moment to tell his domestic audience that the country’s problems are stemming from Trump’s policies and the whole world is suffering because of those tariffs and it’s not related to Chinese policies, Liang said.

A possible decoupling

All of this also signals that Beijing seems to be prepared to “decouple” from the US more than ever, a significant change in mentality, as, in the past, the standard response to the idea was that it would be a “lose-lose” situation for both countries, Liang told Al Jazeera.

But in the last few years, China has diversified its exports to other countries, especially those in its Belt and Road Initiative, the ambitious infrastructure project that it launched in 2013 to link East Asia through Europe and has since expanded to Africa, Oceania and Latin America.

Even when it comes to things that it needs from the US – soya beans, aeroplanes and high-tech chip equipment – it can find other suppliers or has learned to work around that need, as is the case for the chip equipment, Liang pointed out.

In the meantime, especially in the years since the US-China trade war started under Trump as president in his first term, China has brought in a set of national security laws – including its version of the US Entity List, through which it is setting limits on those exports, Nadjibulla said.

“Everybody should have been preparing the way the Chinese have been preparing. We breathed a sigh of relief when there was a change in government [in the US after the first Trump administration], but China kept preparing,” she said.

“This should be a wake-up call for all countries to find other sources for its needs. Everyone should be redoubling their efforts to diversify, because we have now seen the Chinese playbook.”

US President Donald Trump said the deal had been negotiated over the last four to five months.

United States President Donald Trump and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese have signed an agreement on rare earth and critical minerals as China tightens control over global supply.

The two leaders signed the deal on Monday at the White House.

Trump said the agreement had been negotiated over four or five months. The two leaders will also discuss trade, submarines and military equipment, Trump said.

Albanese described it as an $8.5bn pipeline “that we have ready to go”.

The full terms of the agreement were not immediately available. The two leaders said part of the agreement had to do with processing of the minerals. Albanese said both countries will contribute $1bn over the next six months for joint projects.

China has the world’s largest rare earths reserves, according to the US Geological Survey data, but Australia also has significant reserves.

The two leaders also planned to discuss the $239.4bn agreement, reached in 2023 under then-US President Joe Biden, in which Australia is to buy US nuclear-powered submarines in 2032 before building a new submarine class with Britain.

US Navy Secretary John Phelan told the meeting the US and Australia were working very closely to improve the original framework for all three parties “and clarify some of the ambiguity that was in the prior agreement”.

Trump said these were “just minor details”.

“There shouldn’t be any more clarifications, because we’re just, we’re just going now full steam ahead, building,” Trump said.

Australian officials have said they are confident it will proceed, with Defence Minister Richard Marles last week saying he knew when the review would conclude.

China’s rare earth export controls

Ahead of Monday’s meeting between the two leaders, Australian officials have emphasised Canberra is paying its way under AUKUS — a trilateral military partnership between the US, Australia and the United Kingdom, contributing $2bn this year to boost production rates at US submarine shipyards, and preparing to maintain US Virginia-class submarines at its Indian Ocean naval base from 2027.

The delay of 10 months in an official meeting since Trump took office has caused some anxiety in Australia as the Pentagon urged Canberra to lift defence spending. The two leaders met briefly on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York last month.

Australia is willing to sell shares in its planned strategic reserve of critical minerals to allies including Britain, as Western governments scramble to end their reliance on China for rare earths and minor metals.

Top US officials last week condemned Beijing’s expansion of rare earth export controls as a threat to global supply chains. China is the world’s biggest producer of the materials, which are vital for products ranging from electric vehicles to aircraft engines and military radars.

Resource-rich Australia, wanting to extract and process rare earths, put preferential access to its strategic reserve on the table in US trade negotiations in April.

Trump has recently targeted India for its Russian oil purchases, imposing tariffs on Indian exports to the US.

United States President Donald Trump says that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has pledged to stop buying oil from Russia, and Trump said he would next try to get China to do the same as Washington intensifies efforts to cut off Moscow’s energy revenues.

India and China are the two top buyers of Russian seaborne crude exports, taking advantage of the discounted prices Russia has been forced to accept after European buyers shunned purchases and the US and the European Union imposed sanctions on Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Trump has recently targeted India for its Russian oil purchases, imposing tariffs on Indian exports to the US to discourage the country’s crude buying as he seeks to choke off Russia’s oil revenues and pressure Moscow to negotiate a peace deal with Ukraine.

“So I was not happy that India was buying oil, and he assured me today that they will not be buying oil from Russia,” Trump told reporters during a White House event.

“That’s a big step. Now we’re going to get China to do the same thing.”

The Indian embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to emailed questions about whether Modi had made such a commitment to Trump.

Russia is India’s top oil supplier. Moscow exported 1.62 million barrels per day to India in September, roughly one-third of the country’s oil imports. For months, Modi resisted US pressure, with Indian officials defending the purchases as vital to national energy security.

A move by India to stop imports would signal a major shift by one of Moscow’s top energy customers and could reshape the calculus for other nations still importing Russian crude. Trump wants to leverage bilateral relationships to enforce economic isolation on Russia, rather than relying solely on multilateral sanctions.

During his comments to reporters, Trump added that India could not “immediately” halt shipments, calling it “a little bit of a process, but that process will be over soon”.

Despite his push on India, Trump has largely avoided placing similar pressure on China. The US trade war with Beijing has complicated diplomatic efforts, with Trump reluctant to risk further escalation by demanding a halt to Chinese energy imports from Russia.

Stellantis announced a $13bn investment in the US, which will see production of the Jeep Compass move to the US from Canada.

Canada has threatened legal action against carmaker Stellantis NV over what Ottawa says is the company’s unacceptable plan to shift production of one model to a United States plant.

On Wednesday, Minister of Industry Melanie Joly sent a letter to Stellantis CEO Antonio Filosa noting that the company had agreed to maintain its Canadian presence in exchange for substantial financial support.

“Anything short of fulfilling that commitment will be considered a default under our agreement,” she said. If Stellantis did not live up to its commitment, Canada would “exercise all options, including legal”, she said.

Stellantis announced a $13bn investment in the US on Tuesday, a move that it said would bring five new models to the market. As part of the plan, production of the Jeep Compass will move to the US state of Illinois from a facility in Brampton in the Canadian province of Ontario.

A copy of the letter was made available to the Reuters news agency. The existence of the letter was first reported by Bloomberg.

Stellantis had paused retooling of the Brampton plant in February, shortly after US President Donald Trump announced tariffs against Canadian goods, upending the highly integrated North American auto industry.

In a statement on Tuesday night, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney said Ottawa had made clear it expected Stellantis to fulfil the undertakings it had made to the workers at the plant.

“We are working with the company to develop the right measures to protect Stellantis employees,” he said.

Ontario is Canada’s industrial heartland and accounts for about 40 percent of its national gross domestic product (GDP).

“I have spoken with Stellantis to stress my disappointment with their decision,” Ontario Premier Doug Ford said on social media on Wednesday.

Stellantis spokesperson LouAnn Gosselin said the company was investing in Canada and noted plans to add a third shift to a plant in Windsor, Ontario.

“Canada is very important to us. We have plans for Brampton and will share them upon further discussions with the Canadian government,” she said in an emailed statement.

Spain argues NATO funding should address real threats, not arbitrary targets, amidst Trump’s tariff retaliation plans.

The European Commission and Spain’s government have dismissed US President Donald Trump’s latest threat to impose higher tariffs on Madrid over its refusal to meet his proposed NATO target for defence spending.

Trump said on Tuesday that he was “very unhappy” with Spain for being the only NATO member to reject the new spending objective of 5 percent of economic output, adding that he was considering punishing the Mediterranean country.

“I was thinking of giving them trade punishment through tariffs because of what they did, and I think I may do that,” Trump added. He had previously suggested making Spain “pay twice as much” in trade talks.

Trade policy falls under the remit of Brussels, and the European Commission would “respond appropriately, as we always do, to any measures taken against one or more of our member states”, commission spokesperson Olof Gill said in a press briefing on Wednesday.

The trade deal between the European Union and the United States signed in July was the right platform to address any issues, Gill added.

“The defence spending debate is not about increasing spending for the sake of increasing it, but about responding to real threats,” Spain’s Economy and Trade Ministry said in a statement.

“We’re doing our part to develop the necessary capabilities and contribute to the collective defence of our allies.”

Spain has more than doubled nominal defence spending from 0.98 percent of gross domestic product in 2017 to 2 percent this year, equivalent to about 32.7bn euros ($38bn).

Defence Minister Margarita Robles said allies weren’t discussing the 5 percent target for 2035 in Wednesday’s meeting because they were prioritising the present situation in Ukraine, but wouldn’t completely rule out a shift in Spain’s position.

Targeted tariffs by the US against individual EU member states are rare, but there are precedents, said Ignacio Garcia Bercero, a senior fellow at the Brussels-based economic think tank Bruegel.

In 1999, the US hit the EU with 100 percent punitive tariffs on products such as chocolate, pork, onions and truffles in retaliation for an EU import ban on hormone-treated beef. But those tariffs excluded Britain, which at the time was still a member of the trade bloc.

The US could impose anti-dumping penalties on European products that are mostly produced in Spain, said Juan Carlos Martinez Lazaro, professor at Madrid’s IE business school.

In 2018, Washington imposed a combination of duties of more than 30 percent on Spanish black table olives at the request of Californian olive growers. Spain’s share of the US market plummeted from 49 percent in 2017 to 19 percent in 2024.

Another option would be moving the naval and air bases the US has in southern Spain to Morocco – an idea floated by former Trump official Robert Greenway – which would damage the local economies through the loss of thousands of indirect jobs.

The United States and China have started charging additional port fees on ocean shipping firms that move everything from holiday toys to crude oil, making the high seas a key front in the trade war between the world’s two largest economies.

A return to an all-out trade war appeared imminent last week, after China announced a major expansion of its rare earths export controls, and US President Donald Trump threatened to raise tariffs on Chinese goods to triple digits.

But after the weekend, both sides sought to reassure traders and investors, highlighting cooperation between their negotiating teams and the possibility they could find a way forward.

China said it had started to collect the special charges on US-owned, operated, built or flagged vessels, but it clarified that Chinese-built ships would be exempted from the levies.

In details published by state broadcaster CCTV, China spelled out specific provisions on exemptions, which also include empty ships entering Chinese shipyards for repair.

Similar to the US plan, the new China-imposed fees would be collected at the first port of entry on a single voyage or for the first five voyages within a year.

“This tit-for-tat symmetry locks both economies into a spiral of maritime taxation that risks distorting global freight flows,” Athens-based Xclusiv Shipbrokers said in a research note.

Early this year, the Trump administration announced plans to levy the fees on China-linked ships to loosen the country’s grip on the global maritime industry and bolster US shipbuilding.

An investigation during the administration of former US President Joe Biden concluded that China uses unfair policies and practices to dominate the global maritime, logistics and shipbuilding sectors, clearing the way for those penalties.

China hit back last week, saying it would impose its own port fees on US-linked vessels from the same day the US fees took effect.

“We are in the hectic stage of the disruption, where everyone is quietly trying to improvise workarounds, with varying degrees of success,” said independent dry bulk shipping analyst Ed Finley-Richardson. He said he has heard reports of US shipowners with non-Chinese vessels trying to sell their cargoes to other countries while en route, so the vessels can divert.

The Reuters news agency was not immediately able to confirm this.

Tit-for-tat moves

Analysts expect China-owned container carrier COSCO to be the most affected by the US fees, shouldering nearly half of that segment’s expected $3.2bn cost from the fees in 2026.

Major container lines, including Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd and CMA CGM, slashed their exposure by switching China-linked ships out of their US shipping lanes. Trade officials there reduced fees from initially proposed levels, and exempted a broad swath of vessels after heavy pushback from the agriculture, energy and US shipping industries.

The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Reuters.

China’s Ministry of Commerce on Tuesday said, “If the US chooses confrontation, China will see it through to the end; if it chooses dialogue, China’s door remains open.”

In a related move, Beijing also imposed sanctions on Tuesday against five US-linked subsidiaries of South Korean shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean, which it said had “assisted and supported” a US probe into Chinese trade practices.

Hanwha, one of the world’s largest shipbuilders, owns Philly Shipyard in the US and has won contracts to repair and overhaul US Navy ships. Its entities will also build a US-flagged LNG carrier.

Hanwha said it is aware of the announcement and is closely monitoring the potential business impact. Hanwha Ocean’s shares sank by nearly 6 percent.

China also launched an investigation into how the US probe affected its shipping and shipbuilding industries.

A Shanghai-based trade consultant said the new fees may not cause significant upheaval.

“What are we going to do? Stop shipping? Trade is already pretty disrupted with the US, but companies are finding a way,” the consultant told Reuters, requesting anonymity because he was not authorised to speak with the media.

The US announced last Friday a carve-out for long-term charterers of China-operated vessels carrying US ethane and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), deferring the port fees for them through December 10.

Meanwhile, ship-tracking company Vortexa identified 45 LPG-carrying VLGCs — an acronym for very large gas carriers, a type of vessel — that would be subject to China’s port fee. That amounts to 11 percent of the total fleet.

Clarksons Research said in a report that China’s new port fees could affect oil tankers accounting for 15 percent of global capacity.

Meanwhile, Omar Nokta, an analyst at the financial firm Jefferies, estimated that 13 percent of crude tankers and 11 percent of container ships in the global fleet would be affected.

Trade war embroils environmental policy

In a reprisal against China curbing exports of critical minerals, Trump on Friday threatened to slap additional 100 percent tariffs on goods from China and put new export controls on “any and all critical software” by November 1.

Administration officials, hours later, warned that countries voting this week in favour of a plan by the United Nations International Maritime Organization (IMO) to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from ocean shipping could face sanctions, port bans, or punitive vessel charges.

China has publicly supported the IMO plan.

“The weaponisation of both trade and environmental policy signals that shipping has moved from being a neutral conduit of global commerce to a direct instrument of statecraft,” Athens-based Xclusiv said.

China has accused the United States of “double standards” after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose an additional 100 percent tariff on Chinese goods in response to Beijing’s curbs on exports of rare earth minerals.

China says its export control measures announced last week were in response to the US restrictions on its entities and targeting of Beijing’s maritime, logistics and shipbuilding industries.

Trump’s tariff threats, which come weeks ahead of the likely meeting between the US president and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, have the potential to reignite a trade war months after Washington lowered the China tariffs from 125 to 30 percent.

The actions by the world’s two largest economies threaten to ignite a new trade war, adding further uncertainty to global trade. So what’s the recent history of US trade measures against China, and will the two countries be able to resolve their differences?

Why did China tighten export controls on rare earths?

On October 9, China expanded export controls to cover 12 out of 17 rare-earth metals and certain refining equipment, effective December 1, after accusing Washington of harming China’s interests and undermining “the atmosphere of bilateral economic and trade talks”.

China also placed restrictions on the export of specialist technological equipment used to refine rare-earth metals on Thursday.

Beijing justified its measures, accusing Washington of imposing a series of trade curbs on Chinese entities despite the two sides being engaged in trade talks, with the last one taking place in Madrid, Spain last month.

Foreign companies now need Beijing’s approval to export products containing Chinese rare earths, and must disclose their intended use. China said the heightened restrictions come as a result of national security interests.

China has a near monopoly over rare earths, critical for the manufacture of technology such as electric cars, smartphones, semiconductors and weapons.

The US is a major consumer of Chinese rare earths, which are crucial for the US defence industry.

At the end of this month, Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea, and experts speculate that Beijing’s move was to gain bargaining advantage in trade negotiations with Washington.

China’s tightening of restrictions on rare earths is “pre-meeting choreography” before Trump’s meeting with Xi, Kristin Vekasi, the Mansfield chair of Japan and Indo-Pacific Affairs at the University of Montana, told Al Jazeera.

How did Trump respond?

On October 10, Trump announced the imposition of a 100 percent tariff on China, effective from November 1.

“Based on the fact that China has taken this unprecedented position … the United States of America will impose a Tariff of 100 percent on China, over and above any Tariff that they are currently paying,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.

He added that this would come into effect on November 1 or before that. Trump added that the US would also impose export controls on “any and all critical software”.

Earlier on October 10, Trump accused China of “trade hostility” and even said he might scrap his meeting with Xi. It is unclear at this point whether the meeting will take place.

“What the United States has is we have a lot of leverage, and my hope, and I know the president’s hope, is that we don’t have to use that leverage,” US Vice President JD Vance told Fox News on Sunday.

How did China respond to that?

China deemed the US retaliation a “double standard”, according to remarks by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson on Sunday.

China said that Washington had “overstretched the concept of national security, abused export control measures” and “adopted discriminatory practices against China”.

“We are living in an era of deeper intertwining of security and economic policies. Both the US and China have expanded their conceptions of national security, encompassing a range of economic activities,” Manoj Kewalramani, chairperson of the Indo-Pacific Studies Programme at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore, India, told Al Jazeera.

“Both have also weaponised economic interdependence with each other and third parties. There are, in other words, no saints in this game.”

Kewalramani said that China started expanding the idea of “national security” much earlier than others, especially with its “comprehensive national security concept” introduced in 2014.

Through this, China began to include many different areas, such as economics, technology, and society, under the term “national security”. This shows that China was ahead of other countries in broadening what counts as a national security issue.

China threatened additional measures if Trump went ahead with his pledge.

“Willful threats of high tariffs are not the right way to get along with China. China’s position on the trade war is consistent: we do not want it, but we are not afraid of it,” the Chinese Commerce Ministry spokesperson said in a statement.

“Should the US persist in its course, China will resolutely take corresponding measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests,” the statement said.

What trade measures has the US taken against China in recent history?

2025: Trump unleashes tariff war

A month after taking office for his second term, Trump signed an executive order imposing a 10 percent tariff on all imports from China, citing a trade deficit in favour of China. In this order, he also imposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada. China levied countermeasures, imposing duties on US products in retaliation.

In March, the US president doubled the tariff on all Chinese products to 20 percent as of March 4. China imposed a 15 percent tariff on a range of US farm exports in retaliation; these took effect on March 10.

Trump announced his “reciprocal tariffs,” imposing a 34 percent tariff on Chinese products. China retaliated, also announcing a 34 percent tariff on US products. This was the first time China announced export controls on rare earths.

Hours after the reciprocal tariffs went into effect, Trump paused them for all his tariff targets except China. The US and China continued to hike tit-for-tat levies on each other.

Trump slapped 145 percent tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting China to hit back with 125 percent tariffs. Washington and Beijing later cut tariffs to 30 percent and 10 percent, respectively, in May, then agreed to a 90-day truce in August for trade talks. The truce has been extended twice.

December 2024: The microchip controls are tightened

In December 2024, Trump’s predecessor, former US President Joe Biden, tightened controls on the sale of microchips first introduced on October 2022.

Under the new controls, 140 companies from China, Japan, South Korea and Singapore were added to a list of restricted entities. The US also banned more advanced chip-making equipment to certain countries. Even products manufactured abroad with US technology were restricted.

April 2024: Biden signs the TikTok ban

Biden signed a bill into law that would ban TikTok unless it was sold to a non-Chinese buyer within a year. The US government alleged that TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance was linked to the Chinese government, making the app a threat to national security.

ByteDance sued the US federal government over this bill in May 2024.

In September this year, Trump announced that a deal was finalised to find a new owner of TikTok.

October 2023: Biden introduces more restrictions on chips

In October 2023, Biden restricted US exports of advanced computer chips, especially those made by Nvidia, to China and other countries.

The goal of this measure was to limit China’s access to “advanced semiconductors that could fuel breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and sophisticated computers that are critical to [Chinese] military applications,” Gina Raimondo, who was secretary of the US Department of Commerce during the Biden administration, told reporters.

Prior to this, Biden signed an executive order in August 2023, creating a programme that limits US investments in certain high-tech areas, including semiconductors, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence, in countries deemed to be a security risk, like China.

October 2022: Biden restricts Chinese access to semiconductors

Biden restricted China’s access to US semiconductors in October 2022. The rules further expanded restrictions on chipmaking tools to include industries that support the semiconductor supply chain, blocking both access to American expertise and the essential components used in manufacturing the tools that produce microchips.

Semiconductors are used in the manufacturing of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. The US government placed these restrictions back then to limit China’s ability to acquire the ability to produce semiconductors and advance in the technological race.

The restrictions made it compulsory for entities within China to apply for licences to acquire American semiconductors. Analysis by the US-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace described these licences as “hard to get” back then.

Recently, some US lawmakers are calling for even more restrictions, warning that China could quickly reverse-engineer advanced semiconductor technologies on its own, outpace the US in the sector, and gain a military edge.

May 2020: Trump cracks down on Huawei

In May 2020, the US Bureau of Industry and Security intensified rules to stop Huawei, the Chinese tech giant, from using American technology and software to design and make semiconductors in other countries.

The new rules said that semiconductors are designed for Huawei using US technology or equipment, anywhere in the world, would need US government approval before being sent to Huawei.

May 2019: Trump bans Huawei

Trump signed an executive order blocking Chinese telecommunications companies like Huawei from selling equipment in the US. The Shenzhen-based Huawei is the world’s largest provider of 5G networks, according to analysis by the New York City-based think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Under this order, Huawei and 114 related entities were added to a list that requires US companies to get special permission (a licence) before selling certain technologies to them.

The rationale behind this order was the allegation that Huawei threatened US national security, had stolen intellectual property and could commit cyber espionage. Some US lawmakers alleged that the Chinese government was using Huawei to spy on Americans. The US did not publicise any evidence to back these allegations.

Other Western countries had also cooperated with the US.

March 2018: Trump imposes tariffs on China

During his first administration, Trump imposed sweeping 25 percent tariffs on Chinese goods worth as much as $60bn. In June of 2018, Trump announced more tariffs.

China retaliated by imposing tariffs on US products. Beijing deemed Trump’s trade policies “trade bullyism practices”, according to an official white paper, as reported by Xinhua news agency.

In September 2018, Trump issued another round of 10 percent tariffs on Chinese products, which were hiked to 25 percent in May 2019.

During the Obama administration (2009-2017)

In 2011, during US President Barack Obama’s tenure, the US-China trade deficit reached an all-time high of $295.5bn, up from $273.1bn in the previous year.

In March 2012, the US, European Union, and Japan formally complained to China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) about China’s limits on selling rare earth metals to other countries. This move was deemed “rash and unfair” by China.

In its ruling, the world trade body said China’s export restraints were breaching the WTO rules.

In 2014, the US indicted five Chinese nationals with alleged ties to China’s People’s Liberation Army. They were charged with stealing trade technology from American companies.

What’s next for the US-China trade war?

Trump and Xi are expected to meet in South Korea on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), which is set to begin on October 31.

But the latest trade dispute has clouded the Xi-Trump meeting.

On Sunday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform, downplaying the threat: “Don’t worry about China, it will all be fine! Highly respected President Xi just had a bad moment. He doesn’t want Depression for his country, and neither do I. The U.S.A. wants to help China, not hurt it!!!”

In an interview with Fox Business Network on Monday, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said, “President Trump said that the tariffs would not go into effect until November 1. He will be meeting with [Communist] Party Chair Xi in [South] Korea. I believe that meeting will still be on.”

When it comes to which of the two players is more affected by the trade war, Kewalramani said that he thinks “what matters is who is willing to bear greater pain, endure greater cost”.

“This is the crucial question. I would wager that Beijing is probably better placed because Washington has alienated allies and partners with its policies since January. But then, China’s growing export controls are not simply aimed at the US. They impact every country. So Beijing has not also endeared itself to anyone,” Kewalramani said, pointing out how Trump’s tariffs and China’s rare earth restrictions target multiple countries.

“The ones affected the most are countries caught in the midst of great power competition.”

On Sunday, US VP Vance told Fox News about China: “If they respond in a highly aggressive manner, I guarantee you, the president of the United States has far more cards than the People’s Republic of China.”

Kewalramani said that so far, Beijing has been more organised, prepared and strategic than the US in its policies.

“That said, it has overreached with the latest round of export controls. US policy, meanwhile, has lacked strategic coherence. The US still is the dominant global power and has several cards to play. What matters, however, is whether it can get its house in order.”

ADVERTISEMENT

There has been a huge wave of relief across European and US markets after Friday proved to be a dark day for investors.

Leading European stock indexes started the week in the green, as well as the US futures, while bitcoin, silver and gold rallied.

After leading stock indexes on the Wall Street dropped between 1.9 and 3.6% on Friday, Asian indexes followed the lead on Monday morning, and unanimously lost between 1% and 1.7%.

US stocks skidded on Friday after US President Donald Trump threatened to crank tariffs higher on China, signalling more trouble ahead between the two biggest economies. He was responding to restrictions Beijing is imposing on exports of rare earths, which are materials that are critical for the manufacturing of everything from consumer electronics to jet engines.

However, by the European opening on Monday, investors appeared to be cheered by the US president’s promising words, as he commented on the mounting US-China trade tensions on social media, saying, “Don’t worry about China, it will all be fine!”

Stock markets appear to reverse the losses from the end of last week, the FTSE 100 in London was up by 0.3% at around 10h CET on Monday, the Paris CAC 40 cheered the promise of a new government by gaining 0.7% and the Dax in Frankfurt joined the crowd by rising 0.5% by this time.

The Ibex 35 in Madrid also gained 0.8% and the European benchmark Stoxx 600 was up by nearly 0.5%.

Crypto rallies after Friday’s sharp decline

Bitcoin approached $115,000 on Monday, while Ethereum exceeded $4,200.

“The crypto market capitalisation stood at $3.9 trillion on Monday, up 4.4% from the previous day but down 6% from pre-Friday crash levels,” Alex Kuptsikevich, the FxPro chief market analyst, said.

Gold was up by more than 2.3%, trading at $4,092 an ounce, nearing 11h CET, while oil prices were also climbing, the US benchmark crude was up by nearly 0.9% at 59.85 a barrel, whereas the international benchmark Brent cost $63.69 a barrel, 1.5% increase in the price.

Meanwhile, US futures advanced, with the contract for the S&P 500 gaining 1.1% while that for the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 1.5% and Nasdaq futures were climbing 2% by 10.30 CET.

In other dealings early Monday, the dollar rose 152.22 Japanese yen from 151.89 yen late Friday. The euro fell to $1.1605 from $1.1614.

Beijing says it will not back down in the face of threats, urging the US to resolve differences through negotiations.

China has called United States President Donald Trump’s new tariffs on Chinese goods hypocritical as it defended its curbs on exports of rare earth elements and equipment, while stopping short of imposing additional duties on US imports.

In a lengthy statement on Sunday, China’s Ministry of Commerce said its export controls on rare earths, which Trump had labelled “surprising” and “very hostile”, were introduced in response to a series of US measures since their trade talks held in Madrid, Spain, last month.

“China’s stance is consistent,” the ministry said in a statement posted online. “We do not want a tariff war but we are not afraid of one.”

Trump on Friday retaliated to the Chinese curbs on rare earth exports by announcing a 100 percent tariff on Chinese exports to the US and new export controls on critical software, effective from November 1.

Beijing cited Washington’s decision to blacklist Chinese firms and impose port fees on China-linked ships as examples of what it called “provocative and damaging” actions, calling Trump’s tariff threat a “typical example of double standards”.

“These actions have severely harmed China’s interests and undermined the atmosphere for bilateral economic and trade talks. China firmly opposes them,” the ministry said.

Unlike earlier rounds of tit-for-tat tariffs, China has not yet announced any countermeasures.

Rare earths have been a major sticking point in recent trade negotiations between the two superpowers. They are critical to manufacturing everything from smartphones and electric vehicles to military hardware and renewable energy technology.

China dominates the global production and processing of these materials. On Thursday, it announced new controls on the export of technologies used for the mining and processing of critical minerals.

The renewed trade tensions between the world’s two largest economies also risk derailing a potential summit between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea later this month. It would have been their first face-to-face encounter since Trump returned to power in January.

The dispute has also rattled global markets, dragging down major tech stocks and worrying companies reliant on China’s dominance in rare earth processing.

The European Union’s plan to hike tariffs on steel imported over and above its annual threshold could tip the United Kingdom’s steel industry into its worst crisis in history, industry leaders have warned.

On Tuesday, the European Commission proposed that the 27-member bloc would slash its tariff-free steel import quota by 47 percent to 18.3 million tonnes and would impose a tariff of 50 percent on any steel imported in excess of this amount.

This represents a sharp hike: The EU’s current annual steel import quota stands at 33 million tonnes, and imports above this limit are subject to a 25 percent tariff.

The announcement has rattled the British steel industry, which exports nearly 80 percent of its steel to the EU.

“This is perhaps the biggest crisis the UK steel industry has ever faced,” Gareth Stace, director general of the lobby group UK Steel, said on Tuesday. He described the move as a “disaster” for British steel.

Community, a trade union representing UK steelworkers, said the EU’s proposal represents an “existential threat” to the UK steel industry.

Here’s what we know about the EU’s new levies and why the UK is worried:

Why has the EU announced a tariff hike for steel imports?

The new tariff is expected to come into effect from June 2026, as long as EU countries and the European Parliament approve it.

The EU says it has no choice but to bring in the new tariff as it seeks to protect its own markets from a flood of subsidised Asian steel, which has been diverted by US President Donald Trump’s latest 50 percent tariff on all steel imports to the US.

The EU also wants to protect its steel sector from the challenge of global overcapacity.

In a speech at the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday, the European Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security, Maros Sefcovic, defended the bloc’s steel tariffs proposal as a move to “protect the bloc’s vital sector” whose steel trade balance has “deteriorated dramatically”.

Sefcovic added that more than 30,000 jobs have been lost since 2018 in the EU’s steel industry, which employs about 300,000 people overall.

While the industry is ailing, he said, other countries have begun imposing tariffs and other safeguards to ensure their own domestic steel industries expand. The Commission’s proposal, therefore, seeks to “restore balance to the EU steel market”.

More succinctly, a senior EU official told The Times newspaper: “My dear UK friends, you have to understand that we have no choice but to limit the total volumes of imports that come into the EU, so this is the logic that we apply clearly. Not acting could result in potentially fatal effects for us.”

The EC’s proposal comes as the bloc’s steel sector faces stiff competition from countries like China, where steel production is heavily subsidised.

China produced more than a billion metric tonnes of steel last year, followed by India, at 149 million metric tonnes, and Japan, at 84 million metric tonnes, according to the World Steel Association, a nonprofit organisation with headquarters in Brussels.

By comparison, said Sefcovic, the EU produces 126 million tonnes per year but only requires 67 percent of this for its own use – “well below the healthy 80 percent benchmark and below profitable levels”.

Moreover, steel production within the EU has declined by 65 million tonnes per year since 2007 – with nearly half of that lost since 2018.

“A strong, decarbonised steel sector is vital for the European Union’s competitiveness, economic security and strategic autonomy. Global overcapacity is damaging our industry,” EC President Ursula von der Leyen said.

The Commission’s industry chief, Stephane Sejourne, told reporters in Strasbourg that “the European steel industry was on the verge of collapse” and said that through the tariffs plan, the Commission is “protecting it [EU’s steel industry] so that it can invest, decarbonise and become competitive again”.

Sejourne added that the Commission’s plan is “in line with our [EU] values and international law”.

Why would the UK bear the brunt of EU steel tariffs?

The EU is the UK’s largest market for steel exports by far. In 2024, the UK exported 1.9 million metric tonnes of steel, worth about 3 billion pounds ($4.02bn) and representing 78 percent of its home-made steel products to the EU.

While the EC’s steel tariffs proposal does not apply to members of the European Economic Area, namely Norway and Iceland, it will apply to the UK and Switzerland. Ukraine will also be exempt from the tariff quota since it is facing “an exceptional and immediate security situation”, according to the EC.

The EU says it is open to negotiations with the UK once it has formally notified the World Trade Organization (WTO) of the new levy. For now, however, uncertainty looms.

Compounding this, the UK also fears being flooded by cheaper, subsidised steel from Asia as both the EU and US markets close their doors to it.

In a statement, UK Steel added: “The potential for millions of tonnes that will be barred from the EU market, to be redirected towards the UK is another existential threat.”

Nicolai von Ondarza, an associate fellow at Chatham House, the London-based policy institute, told Al Jazeera that cheap steel diverted by the EU’s planned tariffs will mostly come from countries like China, “putting additional pressure on its industry”.

The British steel sector is also shouldering Trump’s 25 percent tariff on British steel imports, a global supply glut, and higher energy prices, and has been embattled by job losses in some of its biggest steelworks due to green transition initiatives.

Can the UK negotiate its way out of this?

That is currently its best hope, according to industry leaders.

“We would urge the UK and EU to begin urgent negotiations and do everything possible to prevent the crushing impact these proposals would have on our steel industry,” he added.

Chatham House’s Ondarza told Al Jazeera: “For the UK, the first route is to try to negotiate a carve-out of these EU tariffs. Both the EC and the UK have already signalled willingness to talk. These negotiations are likely to be tricky, but not unlikely that they come to an agreement.”

On his way for a two-day business trip to India, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer told reporters that his country is “in discussions with the EU” about the proposal.

“I’ll be able to tell you more in due course, but we are in discussions, as you’d expect,” he said.

Meanwhile, Chris McDonald, the UK industry minister, has suggested that retaliatory measures may not be completely off the table.

“We continue to explore stronger trade measures to protect UK steel producers from unfair behaviours,” he told reporters.

If the US caused this, can it help to solve it?

While the EU’s tariffs proposal has led to an outcry in the UK, it is also a measure which seeks to bring the US to the negotiating table, the EC says.

In August, the EU and US agreed a trade deal under which Washington will levy 15 percent tariffs on 70 percent of Europe’s exports to the country. Brussels and Washington have yet to discuss how tariffs would apply to European steel, which still faces a 50 percent tariff under Trump’s new trade regime.

Sefcovic told reporters the Commission’s steel tariffs proposal would be a good foundation to engage with the US and also fight the challenge of overcapacity as “like-minded partners”.

Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney is on his second visit to the White House in five months as he deals with increasing pressure to address US tariffs on steel, autos and other goods that are hurting Canada’s economy.

Carney and United States President Donald Trump met at the White House on Tuesday.

“From the beginning, I liked him, and we’ve had a good relationship,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, sitting next to Carney.

“We have natural conflict. We also have mutual love … you know we have great love for each other,” he added, saying the two men would discuss tariffs including potentially lowering tariffs on key Canadian sectors as part of efforts to ease trade tensions between Washington and Ottawa.

More than 77 percent of Canada’s exports go to the US.

A Canadian government official and several analysts played down the chances of an imminent trade deal with Trump and said the mere fact that discussions are continuing should be considered a success for Carney.

Among the topics up for discussion are trade and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which is critical to Canada’s economy and is up for a review next year.

Trump said he was willing to revisit the free trade agreement, which was enacted during his first term, or seek “different deals.”

“We could renegotiate it, and that would be good, or we can just do different deals,” he said. “We’re allowed to do different deals.”

Trump exhibited a fondness for Carney, something he didn’t display toward Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau. He described Carney as a “world-class leader” and said he’s a tough negotiator.

The prime minister last visited the Oval Office in May, when he bluntly told Trump that Canada would never be for sale in response to Trump’s repeated threat to purchase or annex Canada.

Since then, the prime minister has made numerous concessions to Canada’s biggest trading partner, including dropping some counter tariffs and scrapping a digital services tax aimed at US tech companies.

Carney’s office has said the working visit will focus on forging a new economic and security relationship with the US.

“In areas where we compete, we have to come to an agreement that works, ” Carney said.

White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said on Monday: “I’m sure trade will be a topic of discussion … and all of the other issues that are facing both Canada and the United States.”

While the majority of Canada’s exports are entering the US tariff-free under the USMCA, tariffs have pummeled Canada’s steel, aluminium and auto sectors and a number of small businesses.

“The reality is that right now, Canadian products have among the lowest tariff rate,” said Jonathan Kalles, a former adviser to Carney’s predecessor, Trudeau. “You don’t want to poke the bear when things could be much worse,” he said, adding that any meeting with Trump is a calculated risk.

“Carney will probably get a better deal through private negotiations, not the pomp and ceremony of going to the White House,” he said.

Growing pressure

Carney won an election in April promising to be tough with Trump and secure a new economic relationship with the US.

Shachi Kurl, president of the Angus Reid Institute, said polls show Canadians have largely been willing to give Carney time to deal with Trump.

“But that amount of time is finite,” Kurl said, noting pressure may build with job losses mounting and economic growth hobbled by US tariffs.

Canada’s opposition leader, Pierre Poilievre, has criticised Carney’s approach to Trump, noting the prime minister’s earlier pledge to “negotiate a win” by July 21. He said on Monday that it did not look like Carney would accomplish much in the trip.

Dominic LeBlanc, the minister responsible for Canada-US trade, said in response that Canada has work to do on sectoral tariffs.

“Was the leader of the opposition suggesting that if the president of the United States invites us to go to Washington for a meeting and a working lunch, we should have just said ‘no’ and hung the phone up?” LeBlanc said in Parliament.

Asa McKercher, a specialist in Canada-US relations at St Francis Xavier University, said Carney’s meeting with Trump would be a success if there is any recognition that Canada has moved to address some of Trump’s persistent grievances.

“Carney has just set up this new defence agency and boosted military spending, so it would be great if Trump could reduce some of those sectoral tariffs on autos,” McKercher said, citing Trump’s past complaint that Canada is a “military free rider”.

Last month, US President Donald Trump had said he would introduce new tariffs to protect the manufacture of medium- and heavy-duty trucks from outside competition.

United States President Donald Trump has said that all medium- and heavy-duty trucks imported into the country will face a 25 percent tariff rate starting November 1, a significant escalation of his effort to protect US companies from foreign competition.

Trump made the announcement on Monday.

Last month, Trump had said heavy truck imports would face new duties on October 1 on national security grounds, saying the new tariffs were to protect manufacturers from “unfair outside competition” and that the move would benefit companies such as Paccar-owned Peterbilt and Kenworth and Daimler Truck-owned Freightliner.

Under trade deals reached with Japan and the European Union, the US has agreed to 15 percent tariffs on light-duty vehicles, but it is not clear if that rate will be set for larger vehicles.

The Trump administration has also allowed producers to deduct the value of US components from tariffs paid on light-duty vehicles assembled in Canada and Mexico.

Larger vehicles include trucks for delivery, garbage pickup, and public utilities; buses for transit, shuttles, and schools; tractor-trailer trucks; semitrucks; and heavy-duty vocational vehicles.

Impact on allies

The US Chamber of Commerce earlier urged the US Commerce Department not to impose new truck tariffs, noting the top five import sources are Mexico, Canada, Japan, Germany, and Finland, “all of which are allies or close partners of the United States posing no threat to US national security”.

Mexico is the largest exporter of medium- and heavy-duty trucks to the US. A study released in January said imports of those larger vehicles from Mexico have tripled since 2019 to around 340,000 today, according to government statistics.

Under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) trade deal, medium- and heavy-duty trucks move free of tariffs if at least 64 percent of a heavy truck’s value originates in North America, via parts like engines and axles, raw materials such as steel, or assembly labour.

Tariffs could also affect Chrysler’s parent company Stellantis, which produces heavy-duty Ram trucks and commercial vans in Mexico. Stellantis had been lobbying the White House not to impose steep tariffs on its Mexican-made trucks.

Sweden’s Volvo Group is building a $700m heavy-truck factory in Monterrey, Mexico, due to start operations in 2026.

Mexico is home to 14 manufacturers and assemblers of buses, trucks, and tractor trucks, and two manufacturers of engines, according to the US International Trade Administration.

Mexico opposed new tariffs, telling the US Commerce Department in May that all Mexican trucks exported to the US have on average 50 percent US content, including diesel engines.

Last year, the US imported almost $128bn in heavy vehicle parts from Mexico, accounting for approximately 28 percent of total US imports, Mexico said.

Trump had imposed a 40 percent US tariff on Brazilian goods in July on top of a 10 percent one earlier even though the United States has a trade surplus with Brazil.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has asked United States President Donald Trump to lift the 40 percent tariff imposed by the US government on Brazilian imports.

The leaders spoke for 30 minutes by phone on Monday. During the call, they exchanged phone numbers in order to maintain a direct line of contact, and President Lula reiterated his invitation for Trump to attend the upcoming climate summit in Belem, according to a statement from Lula’s office.

Shortly after, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he had had a good conversation with Lula.

“We discussed many things, but it was mostly focused on the Economy, and Trade, between our two Countries,” Trump said.

He added that the leaders “will be having further discussions, and will get together in the not too distant future, both in Brazil and the United States”.

The Trump administration had imposed a 40 percent tariff on Brazilian products in July on top of a 10 percent tariff imposed earlier. Lula reminded Trump that Brazil was one of three Group of 20 (G20) countries with which the US maintains a trade surplus, according to the Brazilian leader’s office.

The Trump administration has justified the tariffs by saying that Brazil’s policies and criminal prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro constitute an economic emergency.

Earlier this month, Bolsonaro was convicted of attempting a coup after losing his bid for re-election in 2022, and a panel of the Supreme Court sentenced him to 27 years and three months in prison.

In September, Trump and Lula had a brief encounter at the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, with Trump hailing their “excellent chemistry”.

During Monday’s call, Lula also offered to travel to Washington to meet with Trump, his office said.

US President Donald Trump announced earlier this week that his administration would launch a new website, called TrumpRx, which will allow American consumers to buy prescription drugs from pharmaceutical companies at discounted prices.

Pfizer, the first United States pharmaceutical group to sign up to the website, said it would offer discounts of up to 85 percent on the cost of its medicines for those not using health insurance policies to pay and for those on the government’s low-cost insurance programme, Medicaid. Pfizer will also sell medicines to the Medicaid programme itself at lower prices.

The announcement prompted shares in the pharmaceuticals sector to lift sharply this week, signalling a favourable response from markets and the pharmaceuticals industry.

Here’s what we know about the new service, why it is being launched and how it will work.

What is TrumpRx and when is it being launched?

The new website will be launched in early 2026. It is a platform from which consumers will be able to buy prescription medicines directly from pharmaceutical companies without going through insurance.

On the site, consumers will be able to search for the prescription drug required and then be directed to the drug’s manufacturing company.

They will have access to discounted prices much closer to those typically paid by national health services in foreign countries at what are known as “most favoured nation” prices.

Beneficiaries of Medicaid – the federal government insurance programme for adults and children from lower-income backgrounds – will also be able to use the site.

“By taking this bold step, we’re ending the era of global price gouging at the expense of American families,” Trump told a news conference on Tuesday.

What are ‘most favoured nation’ prices?

“Most favoured nation” (MFN) prices are those that national health services in other countries, including Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Denmark, pay US pharmaceutical companies for prescription drugs.

As these countries buy medicines in bulk, they have much greater purchasing power to demand lower prices than ordinary consumers. This means pharmaceutical companies tend to sell their drugs at a much lower price to other countries than they do domestically.

The US cannot leverage this sort of purchasing power because it does not have a national health service, so the government cannot influence the price of drugs in the same way.

The Trump administration argues that this means US pharmaceutical companies are effectively subsidising foreign health services while artificially inflating prices for American consumers. In May this year, therefore, he signed an executive order aimed at reducing prescription drug prices in the US, stating: “The United States will no longer subsidise the health care of foreign countries.”

When a country grants MFN status, it commits to providing the recipient country with the same trade advantages it gives to any other country with MFN status, but not necessarily the same low prices – prices still vary from country to country. However, it is understood that companies will be expected to offer drugs at their lowest selling price in any other country.

What else has Trump done about the cost of medicines in the US?

The launch of the new website is just one part of Trump’s strategy to reduce prescription medicine prices in the US.

In July this year, he sent a letter to the CEOs of 17 pharmaceutical companies ordering them to reduce their prices.

In the letter, he laid out demands and promises:

• He called on manufacturers to provide MFN prices to every single Medicaid patient.
• He required manufacturers to stipulate that they will not offer other developed nations better prices for new drugs than prices offered in the United States.
• He promised to provide manufacturers with an avenue to cut out middlemen and sell medicines directly to patients, provided they do so at a price no higher than the best price available in developed nations.
• He promised to use trade policy to support manufacturers in raising prices internationally, provided that increased revenues abroad are reinvested directly into lowering prices for American patients and taxpayers.

The new TrumpRx website addresses the first of these promises.

To address the second promise, Trump has also announced new 100 percent tariffs on imported, branded pharmaceutical products. Companies which set up production facilities and operations in the US will be exempt from these.

He cited the cost of prescription drugs as one of the reasons for levying these tariffs.

How much more do medicines cost in the US than other countries?

According to a 2022 study commissioned by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, published on the US government website, standard insulin prices in the US are as much as 10 times higher than prices in 33 OECD countries.

“Average gross prices in the US were more than 10 times prices in France and the United Kingdom; nearly nine times prices in Italy; more than eight times prices in Japan; about seven times prices in Germany; and more than six times prices in Canada,” the study found.

Many people who take insulin already pay a “net price”, which is lower than the standard price via rebates that the manufacturer agrees with insurance companies. But the net price is still, on average, 2.33 times the price paid in other countries, the report found.

Who will benefit most from this platform?

Anyone who wants to buy prescription drugs direct from pharmaceutical companies, instead of via insurance coverage, at a discounted price can use the platform.

A 2024 report from the US Census Bureau showed that about 8 percent of the US population (26 million people) did not have health insurance in 2023 – so these people may be able to benefit.

The Medicaid programme is also likely to benefit from lower prices as its deal with Pfizer includes more favourable terms. However, details of how this part of the deal will work have not been fully explained.

Currently, most Americans use insurance policies to provide medical care, so initially, most will not use the website, experts said.

Stacie B Dusetzina, professor of health policy at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, told Al Jazeera: “There are a small number of people who may be better off purchasing their medicine this way, but the majority of Americans won’t benefit from this type of model.”

However, she added: “There are other components to the deal that could save the public Medicaid programme money, but without knowing more about how that deal is structured, we can’t say for sure that it would produce savings.”

Which drug companies will sell via the new website?

On Tuesday, Trump said pharma group Pfizer was the first to sign up for the new website.

In return for direct access to consumers, the US pharmaceuticals major has agreed to lower the cost of its prescription drugs for those buying direct via the site (and not using insurance to pay), as well as those on the Medicaid programme. Customers will pay prices closer to “most favoured nation” prices, Trump said.

In a news release, Pfizer said it had “voluntarily agreed to implement measures designed to ensure Americans receive comparable drug prices to those available in other developed countries” and said it will also price “newly launched medicines at parity with other key developed markets”.

“The large majority of the Company’s primary care treatments and some select specialty brands will be offered at savings that will range as high as 85 percent and on average, 50 percent,” the company said in a statement.

The White House and Pfizer gave some examples of primary-care Pfizer medicines which will be available on the TrumpRx website. This is not an exhaustive list:

• Eucrisa, a topical ointment for atopic dermatitis, which will be made available at an 80 percent discount for patients purchasing directly.
• Xeljanz, a widely used oral medication for types of arthritis which will be available at a 40 percent discount.
• Zavzpret, a drug used to treat migraines, which will be sold at a 50 percent discount.
• Duavee, used to treat menopause symptoms, which will be offered at around an 85 percent discount.
• Toviaz, a drug for for overactive bladder.
• Abrilada and Xeljanz, both autoimmune drugs which will be available at significant discounts.

Some of these drugs will remain very expensive even with the discounts. According to Pfizer’s website, Xeljanz, for example, costs around $6,000 per month at the standard price. A 40 percent discount brings this down to $3,600 per month.

Currently, Americans with health insurance can obtain the drug for up to $20 a month – in many cases, their insurance policy terms mean they pay nothing at all.

What else have Pfizer and Trump agreed to under this deal?

Pfizer has agreed to reduce drug prices in the US generally, putting prices in line with those paid in other developed countries, the company said.

The group has also committed to spending $70bn on domestic manufacturing facilities, which will be dedicated to “US research, development and capital projects in the next few years”.

In return, the company will be given a three-year grace period from Trump’s tariffs on branded pharmaceuticals made abroad.

“I think today we are turning the tide, and we are reversing an unfair situation,” Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla said at a news conference on Tuesday alongside Trump, referring to the difference in prices that people in the US pay for medicines compared with consumers overseas.

Will other drug companies follow suit?

Trump said on Tuesday that other pharmaceutical companies are expected to sign up for the new website, but there have been no new official announcements so far.

“It is clear that the deal that Pfizer struck is a friendly one to the industry,” said Dusetzina. “The companies that received letters requesting that they act are all likely to make agreements that I would expect to be similarly structured.

“If nothing else, these companies will want commitments that they can avoid any potential tariffs. That is worth a lot to them and to their shareholders. It will still be unclear, I think, whether the changes that they make have any tangible benefits for the average American.”

Overseas pharmaceutical companies may be able to sign up as well.

Swiss companies, including Novartis and Roche, said that they were eager to work with the Trump administration to make their drugs more affordable to US patients.

Stephan Mumenthaler, director general of scienceindustries – which represents about 250 Swiss chemical and pharmaceutical companies – told the Reuters news agency on Wednesday that he expected “mini deals” to come from Swiss and global pharmaceutical companies in the coming days.

“They are thinking in similar schemes … How can you omit the margins that middlemen are taking away so that you basically have a similar price than before, but the end consumer still gets a lower price,” he said.

Meanwhile, on Monday, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) announced the launch of its own website AmericasMedicines.com, which will enable consumers to directly buy drugs from manufacturers as well.

In a media release, Stephen J Ubl, president and CEO of PhRMA said: “We need policymakers to protect innovation, fix the broken insurance system that burdens patients with high out-of-pocket costs, and ensure foreign governments pay their fair share.”

How have markets reacted?

Pfizer’s share price rose 7 percent in the US on Tuesday and jumped 8 percent on the UK’s stock exchange on Wednesday.

The announcement of the new website also lifted the shares of European pharmaceutical companies, including Merck, Roche and AstraZeneca by about 5 percent.

Chinese Premier Li Qiang says protectionist measures, including hikes in tariffs, are a major cause of global economic stagnancy.

The announced 100% tariff on pharmaceuticals, 25% on trucks, and 30% on furniture, due to come into effect on October 1, reopen the US president’s trade war.

United States President Donald Trump has announced steep new tariffs on pharmaceutical products, big-rig trucks, and home renovation fixtures and furniture.

The announcement late on Thursday signalled the harshest trade plans from Trump since last April’s shock unveiling of reciprocal tariffs on virtually every US trading partner across the globe, marking a revival of the Republican president’s trade war.

Starting on October 1, “we will be imposing a 100% Tariff on any branded or patented Pharmaceutical Product, unless a Company IS BUILDING their Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Plant in America,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

Shares of pharmaceutical companies across Asia with big exposure to the US market fell on Friday, including South Korea’s Samsung Biologics.

Trump’s move was criticised by Australia, which exported pharmaceutical products worth an estimated $1.3bn to the US in 2024, according to the United Nations Comtrade Database.

In a separate post, Trump wrote of a 25 percent tariff on “all ‘Heavy (Big) Trucks’ made in other parts of the world” to support US manufacturers such as “Peterbilt, Kenworth, Freightliner, Mack Trucks and others”.

Foreign companies that compete with these manufacturers in the US market include Sweden’s Volvo and Germany’s Daimler. Shares in both companies were sharply lower in after-hours trading in Europe.

Trump said the truck tariffs were “for many reasons, but above all else, for National Security purposes!”

Earlier this year, the Trump administration launched a so-called Section 232 probe into imports of trucks to “determine the effects of national security”, setting the stage for Thursday’s announcement.

Section 232 is a trade law provision that gives the president broad authority to impose tariffs or other restrictions on imports when they are deemed a threat to national security.

Trump also said a 50 percent tariff on home renovation materials and a 30 percent tariff on upholstered furniture would be imposed, as he claimed that such products were swamping the US market from abroad.

According to the US International Trade Commission, in 2022, imports, mainly from Asia, represented 60 percent of all furniture sold, including 86 percent of all wood furniture and 42 percent of all upholstered furniture.

Shares in home furniture retailers Wayfair and Williams Sonoma, which depend on these imported goods, tumbled in after-hours trading.

Trump’s administration has already imposed a baseline 10 percent tariff on all countries, with higher individualised rates on nations where exports to the US far exceed imports.

Trump has also used emergency powers to impose extra tariffs on trade deal partners Canada and Mexico, as well as on China, citing concerns over fentanyl trafficking and undocumented migration.

It was not yet clear how these new tariffs would factor into the existing measures.

Murdoch will be part of a group of US investors – including Trump allies – trying to take over TikTok’s US operations.

United States President Donald Trump has said media executive Lachlan Murdoch will join a group of American investors seeking to take control of TikTok’s operations in the United States.

In an interview on the Fox News programme Sunday Briefing, Trump said the proposed deal would transfer TikTok’s American assets from Chinese parent company ByteDance to US ownership. He described those involved as prominent people and “American patriots”.

“I think they’re going to do a really good job,” Trump said, adding that TikTok had helped him expand support among young voters during the 2024 election campaign.

One of the proposed investors – Larry Ellison, the co-founder of the tech firm Oracle – is a prominent Republican donor. Lachlan Murdoch’s father Rupert has backed right-wing causes and parties for decades, but has a complicated relationship with Trump, who is currently suing him.

The initiative would give Trump’s allies in corporate America influence over a platform with about 170 million US users, one of the most widely used apps shaping political and cultural debate.

Lachlan Murdoch, the chief executive of Fox Corp, recently consolidated control of his family’s media empire, which includes Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, after settling a long-running legal dispute with his siblings. Trump said the 94-year-old Rupert Murdoch may himself also be involved in the deal.

Murdoch’s media outlets attract right-leaning audiences, but they have occasionally clashed with Trump. The US president’s lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch and the Wall Street Journal is for defamation over a July report linking him to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The newspaper has defended its reporting.

Other business figures named by Trump include Dell Technologies CEO Michael Dell, who, along with Ellison, has previously been connected to discussions on TikTok’s future.

US law passed under the administration of former US President Joe Biden requires ByteDance to divest its TikTok operations, with both Democrats and Republicans supporting the legislation due to security concerns that Beijing could have access to American users’ data.

However, the spotlight on TikTok has also been linked to growing support for Palestinians and opposition to Israel among young Americans, with many pro-Israeli politicians blaming the popular app for the shifting tide.

Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio called for a ban on TikTok soon after the beginning of Israel’s war on Gaza, calling the app biased towards anti-Israel content.

Trump had proposed to ban TikTok during his first term as US president, signing two executive orders in August 2020 that were aimed at restricting the app. However, the US president did a U-turn, pledging to “save” the popular app during his 2024 re-election campaign.

The Trump administration has since tied negotiations over TikTok to wider trade talks with China.

China has consistently denied claims by US lawmakers that Beijing pressures apps like TikTok to collect personal information for the state.

United States President Donald Trump has spent the better part of this week touting a TikTok “deal” with China, but experts say it is far from finalised after both sides shared details of his phone call with President Xi Jinping.

The two leaders spoke by phone on Friday, their first call in three months, but there was no announcement of the sale of the popular social media app that has 170 million US users.

While Trump, in a post after the call on Truth Social, said “It was a very good call … appreciate the TikTok approval”, the version from Beijing was not as clear.

“On TikTok, Xi said China’s position is clear: the Chinese government respects the will of firms and welcomes companies to conduct business negotiations on the basis of market rules to reach a solution consistent with Chinese laws and regulations while balancing interests,” according to the meeting summary in Xinhua, the Reuters news agency reported.

Experts were not surprised.

“Trump is the type of person who often announces frameworks or deals to have deals or a deal that still has a lot of details to be worked out, and this seems to be another example of that,” said Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

The bigger trade deal is likely to wait till Trump and Xi meet on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum that starts on October 31 in Gyeongju in South Korea, “if that happens”, added Ziemba.

Despite the lack of any specific developments from Friday’s call, experts agree that the leaders talking is in itself a sign of a thaw, especially as Xi had previously refused to get on the phone with Trump, despite the multiple meetings in Geneva, London and most recently in Madrid.

“At least they have broken ice after a long while, and it seems like they are ready to negotiate other more difficult issues,” said Wei Liang, a professor at Middlebury Institute of International Studies, where she specialises in international trade and Chinese foreign economic policy, among other topics.

Some scholars, she said, had likened the last few months as worse than the peak of the Cold War between the US and the former Soviet Union, where leaders of the two countries at least had a hotline in place.

The call was days after Trump extended, for the fourth time, a deadline for China’s ByteDance to divest its ownership of TikTok or face a ban in the US under a law passed last year with overwhelming bipartisan support and one that was later upheld by the Supreme Court.

“It will be a very complicated transaction, if it happens,” said Robert Rogowsky, adjunct professor of trade and economic diplomacy at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, both because Beijing is reluctant to exit the app and because of the lack of clarity of future owners and rules around that.

“The value of TikTok is the algorithm which selects for us what we want to see, but in a way that is remarkably controlling,” said Rogowsky.

While the focus in debates on TikTok’s ownership has centred around data security, the real problem, instead, is its “ability to influence” viewers through the algorithm, said Rogowsky.

“Think about the power that would confer on the owners, the power of that incredibly sophisticated algorithm that drives people’s viewing, when that is under the control of a political party or groups [aligned with one], gives them tremendous power to influence.”

Middlebury’s Liang adds that it is unlikely that China would let go of the algorithm and expects “a graceful exit” that would allow both the US and China to get what they want from this deal.

China’s ‘stronger, bolder stand’

Any hammering out of a bigger trade deal on the multiple other issues, including US access to rare earth metals and China’s purchase of Russian oil and access to US semiconductor chips, will have to wait for the two leaders to meet, experts say.

“What is clear is that Trump himself is not in a space to impose new tariffs on China, and that is a reflection of the fact that the US government has mixed interests with respect to China, and the Chinese control some very important choke points,” said Ziemba, referring to China’s hold over critical minerals.

Rogowsky agrees that “China is taking a much stronger, bolder stand with regard to the US, partly because that’s the China way.”

But it is also likely that Beijing has some justification for that confidence, he said, referring to Beijing’s directive to businesses to avoid buying chips from US chip giant Nvidia.

“While US is trying to control what sort of chips go to China, they have declined to buy those, probably because they have the technology to design equally good or better and cheaper chips,” he said. Plus, with US dependence on Chinese rare earth metals, Beijing is “feeling strong enough to confront the US”.

US and Chinese presidents to discuss deal to keep popular social media app online in US, trade relations.

The White House denies any involvement with the deal despite Nvidia’s CEO meeting US President Donald Trump only a day before.

Nvidia says it will invest $5bn into Intel, throwing its heft behind the struggling US chip company, but has stopped short of giving Intel a crucial manufacturing deal.

Nvidia, which is based in Santa Clara, California, announced the investment on Thursday.

The pact, which also includes a plan for Intel and Nvidia to jointly develop personal computer and data centre chips, represents a potential risk to Taiwan’s TSMC. TSMC currently manufactures Nvidia’s flagship processors, a business that the world’s most valuable company could one day extend to Intel. AMD, which competes with Intel for supplying chips to data centres, also stands to lose because of Nvidia’s backing of Intel.

Nvidia, whose must-have chips are powering a global artificial intelligence boom, said in a statement it will pay $23.28 per share for Intel common stock, a price slightly below the $24.90 at which Intel shares closed on Wednesday.

However, that is higher than the $20.47 price per share that the United States government paid for a 10 percent stake it took in Intel last month, an extraordinary development.

The White House has denied any involvement in the deal, which comes only a day after US President Donald Trump met Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang on Wednesday.

New opening

Nvidia’s latest investment will make it one of Intel’s largest shareholders, likely owning 4 percent or more of the company after new shares are issued to complete the deal.

Nvidia’s support represents a new opening for Intel after years of turnaround efforts at the famed US manufacturer failed to pay off.

Intel – once the chip industry’s flagbearer that claimed to put the “silicon” in Silicon Valley – appointed a new CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, in March. Tan has promised to make Intel’s operation lean and build factory capacity only when there’s demand to match it.

Crucially, the deal will not involve Intel’s contract manufacturing business, known as a “foundry” in the chip industry, making chips for Nvidia. Most analysts believe that for Intel’s foundry to survive, it would need to eventually win a large customer such as Nvidia, Apple, Qualcomm or Broadcom.

But the deal adds to a growing reserve of capital that Intel has accumulated weeks after it announced a $2bn investment from Softbank and received $5.7bn from the US government.

David Zinsner, Intel’s chief financial officer, told investors at a Deutsche Bank conference last month that the company was in a “good cash position” and would not require much more capital until it saw significant demand for 14A, a next-generation manufacturing process that it expects to invest heavily in building.

Under the deal announced Thursday, Intel is planning to design custom data-centre central processors that Nvidia will package with its AI chips, known as GPUs. A proprietary Nvidia technology will let the Intel and Nvidia chips communicate at higher speeds than before.

Those speedy links are a key differentiator in the AI market because many chips must be strung together to act as one to chew through massive amounts of data.

At present, Nvidia’s best-selling AI servers with those speedy links are only available using Nvidia’s own chips, but the deal would now put Intel on equal footing, giving it a chance to make money off each Nvidia server.

On Wall Street, Nvidia’s stock is trending upwards. As of 12pm in New York (16:00 GMT), it is up more than 3.4 percent from the market open. Intel stock is surging up more than 29 percent for the day.