China’s Foreign Ministry on Monday emphatically denied that any discussions are underway with the United States to resolve the escalating tariff dispute, directly contradicting repeated assertions by President Trump and senior administration officials. At the same time, an unexpected surge in the euro has piled fresh pain on European exporters already struggling under the weight of transatlantic trade barriers.
“Let me be crystal clear: there have been no consultations or negotiations between China and the U.S. on tariffs,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun told reporters at a regular press briefing in Beijing. He went further to repudiate President Trump’s recent claim that Chinese President Xi Jinping had contacted him directly. “To my knowledge, the two leaders have not spoken recently,” Guo added, underscoring Beijing’s hardline posture amid U.S. duties that now average more than 20 percent on key industrial and consumer goods.
President Trump has repeatedly touted his hefty levies on Chinese imports—ranging from a sweeping 145 percent on small parcels to 25 percent on machinery, electronics and other high-value items—as leverage to secure a more favorable trade balance. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has echoed the administration’s confidence, insisting that America is better positioned to withstand a protracted “trade war” thanks to its domestic energy boom and diversified manufacturing base.
But for companies on both sides of the Pacific, the impasse has translated into snarled supply chains, higher costs and strategic uncertainty. U.S. e-commerce platforms serving millions of small customers quietly implemented “import charges” that in some cases double the final purchase price. Major retailers have privately warned that the erosion of the duty-free threshold for low-value shipments could trigger product shortages and price hikes as early as next quarter.
In Washington, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins claimed on national television that dialogue with Beijing continues “every single day” on a range of issues—despite the Chinese government’s outright denial. “Our teams are talking about multiple categories of trade flows coming in and out,” she said. When pressed on the discrepancy, Rollins suggested that China’s officials were “playing to a different audience.”
Tariff critics in Congress and industry groups argue that the unilateral imposition of duties without reciprocal negotiations is backfiring, driving up costs for American farmers and manufacturers that rely on Chinese components. Several midsize agribusinesses have already reported contract disruptions for soy and pork shipments, signaling that China’s retaliatory taxes are hitting U.S. producers just as hard as the intended target.
Across the Atlantic, the picture has grown even more complicated. The euro soared by nearly 2 percent over the past week, climbing to a six-month high of $1.12, buoyed by stronger-than-expected economic data from Germany and renewed optimism around the European Central Bank’s monetary policy outlook. While a firmer currency helps tame imported inflation, it dents the competitiveness of euro-area exporters just as U.S. buyers are retrenching under America’s new tariffs.
European manufacturers of industrial machinery, automotive parts and consumer electronics report that the stronger euro effectively nullifies any relief from tariff waivers granted by Washington earlier this month. A senior executive at a leading German auto supplier warned that an additional 3 to 5 percent cost hit from currency movements “could tip us from just-barely-profitable to loss-making territory.”
Small and medium-sized exporters in France, Italy and Spain are feeling the pinch most acutely. Many had hoped for a “temporary reprieve” when the U.S. paused duties on select aluminum and steel shipments, only to find that currency strength has more than offset the benefit. With raw material costs rising and order backlogs growing, several family-owned businesses report having to delay capital investments or rethink expansion plans.
Industrial forecasters now anticipate a contraction in European manufacturing output over the coming months if current trade and currency trends persist. Business-confidence surveys in Germany and the Netherlands dropped to six-month lows in April, with firms citing both tariff overhang and exchange-rate volatility as primary headwinds.
In a statement on Monday, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce reiterated its demand that the U.S. “withdraw all unilateral measures” before any talks can proceed. The ministry spokesperson accused Washington of “coercive tactics” and said Beijing would not accept negotiations held under the shadow of coercion. This stance reflects a growing impatience in Beijing with U.S. demands for quick concessions on technology transfer, intellectual property protections and structural economic reforms.
Observers note that China’s refusal to acknowledge any dialogue, even as administration officials in Washington describe daily calls and working-group meetings, deepens the diplomatic stalemate. Without mutual acknowledgment of talks, neither side can claim progress, leaving firms in limbo as they plan inventories, contracts and pricing strategies for the remainder of 2025.
Market participants have already begun to price in the likelihood of a protracted stalemate. Commodity futures tied to metals, plastics and grains show heightened volatility, and shipping rates for containers crossing the Pacific have spiked by nearly 15 percent since early April. Logistics providers warn that shippers are diverting cargoes away from U.S. ports to Southeast Asian hubs, adding both time and expense to global supply chains.
The Trump administration has hinted at fresh trade overtures in the coming weeks, promising new bilateral and multilateral agreements “with numerous countries.” Yet, without clear signals from Beijing that it is ready to engage, business leaders remain skeptical. A coalition of chamber of commerce groups representing dozens of industries urged both governments to “return to the table immediately,” warning that further delays risk “irreversible damage” to global trade networks.
Amid this uncertainty, European policy-makers are exploring contingency plans to shield exporters from the combined effects of U.S. tariffs and euro strength. Proposals under consideration include emergency credit lines, temporary tax rebates on foreign-currency losses and enhanced support for digital sales channels targeting markets in Asia and Latin America. However, analysts caution that such measures could prove costly and only partially effective if the wider trade environment continues to deteriorate.
In the United States, some lawmakers are calling for a more transparent process for imposing and reviewing tariffs, arguing that “trade policy by tweet” harms consumer confidence and complicates long-term business planning. Proposals to reinstate a modest de minimis threshold for low-value imports and to conduct joint impact assessments with trading partners have garnered bipartisan support.
Nonetheless, the prospect of immediate resolution appears dim. In his closing remarks at Monday’s White House briefing, a senior administration official maintained that “China needs us more than we need them,” signaling Washington’s intent to hold firm unless Beijing proffers substantial concessions on market access and state subsidies.
With both sides publicly denying any substantive dialogue—and Europe caught in the crossfire of rising duties and currency gyrations—global trade tensions show no sign of abating. For exporters, importers and consumers alike, the unfolding saga serves as a stark reminder that in today’s interconnected economy, tariff policy and exchange-rate swings can ripple far beyond diplomatic statements, shaping the outlook for growth and prosperity on three continents.
(Source:www.nytimes.com)
“Let me be crystal clear: there have been no consultations or negotiations between China and the U.S. on tariffs,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun told reporters at a regular press briefing in Beijing. He went further to repudiate President Trump’s recent claim that Chinese President Xi Jinping had contacted him directly. “To my knowledge, the two leaders have not spoken recently,” Guo added, underscoring Beijing’s hardline posture amid U.S. duties that now average more than 20 percent on key industrial and consumer goods.
President Trump has repeatedly touted his hefty levies on Chinese imports—ranging from a sweeping 145 percent on small parcels to 25 percent on machinery, electronics and other high-value items—as leverage to secure a more favorable trade balance. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has echoed the administration’s confidence, insisting that America is better positioned to withstand a protracted “trade war” thanks to its domestic energy boom and diversified manufacturing base.
But for companies on both sides of the Pacific, the impasse has translated into snarled supply chains, higher costs and strategic uncertainty. U.S. e-commerce platforms serving millions of small customers quietly implemented “import charges” that in some cases double the final purchase price. Major retailers have privately warned that the erosion of the duty-free threshold for low-value shipments could trigger product shortages and price hikes as early as next quarter.
In Washington, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins claimed on national television that dialogue with Beijing continues “every single day” on a range of issues—despite the Chinese government’s outright denial. “Our teams are talking about multiple categories of trade flows coming in and out,” she said. When pressed on the discrepancy, Rollins suggested that China’s officials were “playing to a different audience.”
Tariff critics in Congress and industry groups argue that the unilateral imposition of duties without reciprocal negotiations is backfiring, driving up costs for American farmers and manufacturers that rely on Chinese components. Several midsize agribusinesses have already reported contract disruptions for soy and pork shipments, signaling that China’s retaliatory taxes are hitting U.S. producers just as hard as the intended target.
Across the Atlantic, the picture has grown even more complicated. The euro soared by nearly 2 percent over the past week, climbing to a six-month high of $1.12, buoyed by stronger-than-expected economic data from Germany and renewed optimism around the European Central Bank’s monetary policy outlook. While a firmer currency helps tame imported inflation, it dents the competitiveness of euro-area exporters just as U.S. buyers are retrenching under America’s new tariffs.
European manufacturers of industrial machinery, automotive parts and consumer electronics report that the stronger euro effectively nullifies any relief from tariff waivers granted by Washington earlier this month. A senior executive at a leading German auto supplier warned that an additional 3 to 5 percent cost hit from currency movements “could tip us from just-barely-profitable to loss-making territory.”
Small and medium-sized exporters in France, Italy and Spain are feeling the pinch most acutely. Many had hoped for a “temporary reprieve” when the U.S. paused duties on select aluminum and steel shipments, only to find that currency strength has more than offset the benefit. With raw material costs rising and order backlogs growing, several family-owned businesses report having to delay capital investments or rethink expansion plans.
Industrial forecasters now anticipate a contraction in European manufacturing output over the coming months if current trade and currency trends persist. Business-confidence surveys in Germany and the Netherlands dropped to six-month lows in April, with firms citing both tariff overhang and exchange-rate volatility as primary headwinds.
In a statement on Monday, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce reiterated its demand that the U.S. “withdraw all unilateral measures” before any talks can proceed. The ministry spokesperson accused Washington of “coercive tactics” and said Beijing would not accept negotiations held under the shadow of coercion. This stance reflects a growing impatience in Beijing with U.S. demands for quick concessions on technology transfer, intellectual property protections and structural economic reforms.
Observers note that China’s refusal to acknowledge any dialogue, even as administration officials in Washington describe daily calls and working-group meetings, deepens the diplomatic stalemate. Without mutual acknowledgment of talks, neither side can claim progress, leaving firms in limbo as they plan inventories, contracts and pricing strategies for the remainder of 2025.
Market participants have already begun to price in the likelihood of a protracted stalemate. Commodity futures tied to metals, plastics and grains show heightened volatility, and shipping rates for containers crossing the Pacific have spiked by nearly 15 percent since early April. Logistics providers warn that shippers are diverting cargoes away from U.S. ports to Southeast Asian hubs, adding both time and expense to global supply chains.
The Trump administration has hinted at fresh trade overtures in the coming weeks, promising new bilateral and multilateral agreements “with numerous countries.” Yet, without clear signals from Beijing that it is ready to engage, business leaders remain skeptical. A coalition of chamber of commerce groups representing dozens of industries urged both governments to “return to the table immediately,” warning that further delays risk “irreversible damage” to global trade networks.
Amid this uncertainty, European policy-makers are exploring contingency plans to shield exporters from the combined effects of U.S. tariffs and euro strength. Proposals under consideration include emergency credit lines, temporary tax rebates on foreign-currency losses and enhanced support for digital sales channels targeting markets in Asia and Latin America. However, analysts caution that such measures could prove costly and only partially effective if the wider trade environment continues to deteriorate.
In the United States, some lawmakers are calling for a more transparent process for imposing and reviewing tariffs, arguing that “trade policy by tweet” harms consumer confidence and complicates long-term business planning. Proposals to reinstate a modest de minimis threshold for low-value imports and to conduct joint impact assessments with trading partners have garnered bipartisan support.
Nonetheless, the prospect of immediate resolution appears dim. In his closing remarks at Monday’s White House briefing, a senior administration official maintained that “China needs us more than we need them,” signaling Washington’s intent to hold firm unless Beijing proffers substantial concessions on market access and state subsidies.
With both sides publicly denying any substantive dialogue—and Europe caught in the crossfire of rising duties and currency gyrations—global trade tensions show no sign of abating. For exporters, importers and consumers alike, the unfolding saga serves as a stark reminder that in today’s interconnected economy, tariff policy and exchange-rate swings can ripple far beyond diplomatic statements, shaping the outlook for growth and prosperity on three continents.
(Source:www.nytimes.com)