turmoil

U.S. President Donald Trump has targeted China with a cascade of tariffs on imports worth billions of dollars in 2025, aiming to narrow the trade deficit, revive domestic manufacturing, and curb the fentanyl trade. The year has seen a mix of escalating tariffs, export controls, partial trade truces, and diplomatic talks as both sides navigate the high-stakes economic and geopolitical confrontation.

Timeline of Key Events:

November 11: China announces it will broaden access and investment opportunities for U.S. companies, especially in the services sector.

November 10: China pauses port fees on U.S.-linked vessels and suspends sanctions on affiliates of South Korean shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean. The FBI director visited China to discuss fentanyl and law enforcement issues.

November 9: China suspends its ban on gallium, germanium, and antimony exports to the U.S., though licences are still required under dual-use controls.

November 7: Export control measures imposed on October 9, including restrictions on rare earths, lithium battery materials, and super-hard materials, are suspended. China begins forming a new rare earth licensing regime to potentially speed up shipments. U.S. soybean and log import licences are restored.

November 6: China purchases U.S. farm products, including wheat and sorghum shipments. COFCO holds a soybean procurement signing ceremony.

November 5: Beijing suspends retaliatory tariffs on U.S. imports from November 10, including farm goods, while maintaining some duties in response to Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs.

October 30: Trump and Xi Jinping strike a new trade truce in South Korea, agreeing on tariff reductions, increased U.S. soybean purchases, and measures against illicit fentanyl trade.

October 25-26: Malaysia talks produce a trade deal framework to be finalized by leaders after U.S. and Chinese officials meet.

October 17: U.S. State Department condemns Chinese sanctions on Hanwha Ocean as coercive.

October 15-16: U.S. officials criticize China’s expanded rare earth export controls; Apple pledges investment in China.

October 14: Both nations impose additional port fees; China sanctions five U.S.-linked Hanwha Ocean units.

October 12-13: China calls new U.S. tariffs hypocritical; U.S. negotiators maintain Trump-Xi talks are on track.

October 10: Trump announces additional levies on imports and export controls on critical software, while threatening Boeing-related measures. China investigates Qualcomm over its purchase of Israeli Autotalks.

October 9: China widens rare earth export controls; U.S. plans to ban Chinese airlines from overflying Russia.

October 1-August 11: Both sides discuss soybean purchases, extend tariff truces, and negotiate rare earth and AI chip licences.

July-June: Framework deals reached for rare earths and magnets; trade truce discussions continue with limited breakthroughs.

May-April: U.S. and China escalate tariffs repeatedly, targeting key goods and tech sectors. Measures include punitive duties, export restrictions on dual-use items, and sanctions on companies.

March-February: Tariffs on Chinese imports rise sharply, with China retaliating on U.S. agricultural exports and key industrial sectors.

Why It Matters:
The trade war has disrupted global supply chains, affected technology access, and influenced agricultural markets. It also carries geopolitical consequences, particularly for U.S.-China relations and for allies in Asia relying on stable trade flows. Rare earths, semiconductors, and AI chips essential for defense and emerging technologies are central to the strategic stakes.

United States: Trump administration, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.

China: President Xi Jinping, Vice Premier He Lifeng, negotiators Li Chenggang and industry regulators.

U.S. Companies: Apple, Nvidia, Boeing, Qualcomm, among others, affected by tariffs, export controls, and investment restrictions.

Global Markets: Critical minerals, rare earths, semiconductors, agricultural commodities, and shipping sectors.

What’s Next:
Despite temporary truce agreements, negotiations remain fluid. Both countries must finalize terms for rare earths, agricultural imports, tariffs, and enforcement mechanisms. Any failure to do so could trigger new rounds of tariffs, impact global supply chains, and increase diplomatic tensions. Private investment and corporate strategy will continue to pivot in response to policy changes.

With information from Reuters.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s skeptical questioning of former President Donald Trump’s global tariffs has fueled speculation that his trade measures may be struck down, potentially upending the already fragile trade landscape.

The case centers on Trump’s use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on imports. The law grants presidents broad authority to regulate trade during national emergencies but makes no mention of tariffs, raising constitutional questions about the limits of executive power.

During oral arguments on Wednesday, justices across the ideological spectrum except Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas appeared doubtful that Trump had legal authority to levy such blanket global tariffs.

Trade experts now warn that if the court invalidates Trump’s tariff policy, it could trigger a new wave of economic uncertainty, as the administration is expected to pivot quickly to other trade laws to reimpose duties.

Why It Matters

The outcome of this case could reshape U.S. trade policy for years. Businesses have paid over $100 billion in IEEPA-related tariffs since 2025, and a ruling against Trump could open a complex refund battle or force the White House to seek alternative legal pathways for its protectionist agenda.

Corporate leaders, already weary of erratic trade shifts, say a ruling either way offers little stability. “Even if it goes against IEEPA, the uncertainty still continues,” said David Young of the Conference Board, who briefed dozens of CEOs after the hearing.

Trump Administration: Faces potential legal defeat but can pivot to Section 232 (Trade Expansion Act of 1962) or Section 122 (Trade Act of 1974), both of which allow temporary or national security-based tariffs.

U.S. Supreme Court: Balancing presidential powers with statutory limits on trade actions.

Businesses & Importers: Risk being caught in regulatory limbo over refunds and future duties.

Federal Reserve: Monitoring potential economic fallout from prolonged trade instability.

Refunds Could Get “Messy”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised concerns about how refund claims would be handled if the tariffs are ruled illegal, calling it “a mess” for courts to manage.
Lawyer Neal Katyal, representing five small businesses challenging the tariffs, said only those firms would automatically receive refunds, while others must file administrative protests a process that could take up to a year.

Customs lawyer Joseph Spraragen added that if the court orders refunds, the Customs and Border Protection’s automated system could process them, but he warned, “The administration is not going to be eager to just roll over and give refunds.”

Economic and Policy Repercussions

Analysts expect the administration to rely on alternative statutes if IEEPA tariffs are overturned. However, implementing new duties under those laws could be slow and bureaucratic, potentially delaying trade certainty until 2026.

Natixis economist Christopher Hodge said such a ruling would be only a “temporary setback” for Trump’s trade agenda, predicting renewed tariff rounds or trade negotiations in the coming year.

Meanwhile, Federal Reserve Governor Stephen Miran warned the uncertainty could act as a drag on economic growth, though it might also prompt looser monetary policy if trade instability dampens business confidence.

What’s Next

A Supreme Court ruling is expected in early 2026, leaving companies in limbo over the future of U.S. tariff policy.
If Trump’s powers under IEEPA are curtailed, analysts expect a new wave of trade maneuvers potentially invoking national security provisions to maintain his “America First” economic approach, prolonging the climate of global trade unpredictability.

With information from Reuters.