In September 2019, U.S. automakers reduced their capital investments and delayed the shutdown due to uncertainty caused by the trade war. [225] In mid-2019, more than 600 companies and trade associations, including manufacturers, retailers and technology companies, wrote to Trump asking him to abolish tariffs and end the trade war, declaring that higher tariffs would have “significant, negative and long-term impacts on U.S. businesses. , farmers, families and the U.S. economy.” [294] President Barack Obama defended the Trans-Pacific Trade Pact to oppose China, which is writing global trade rules for the 21st century. But days after taking office, President Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement and imposed tariffs on trading partners and sparked a trade war with China. For some trade experts, this new agreement shows that the rest of the world will not wait for the United States. The European Union has also conducted trade negotiations at an aggressive pace.

While other countries are signing new agreements, U.S. exporters may gradually lose ground. The pact will most likely formalize business between countries instead of doing it again. The R.C.E.P. eliminates tariffs on products that already qualify for duty-free treatment under existing free trade agreements. It allows countries to maintain tariffs on imports in sectors they consider to be particularly important or sensitive. The so-called rules of origin of the pact will establish common standards as to the quantity of product to be produced in the region so that the final product can benefit from duty-free treatment. These rules could make it easier for companies to create supply chains across several countries. Since the 1980s, Trump has supported tariffs to reduce the U.S. trade deficit and encourage domestic production, and said the country was “ripped off” by its trading partners; The imposition of tariffs has become an important part of his presidential campaign.

[4] A context of the Council of Foreign Relations stated that while many economists and trade experts did not believe that trade deficits were hurting the economy, others felt that persistent trade deficits were often a problem and that there was a substantial debate about the size of the foreign government trade deficit and the policies to be adopted to reduce it. [5] Almost all economists who responded to the Associated Press and Reuters polls said that Trump`s tariffs would do more harm than good to the U.S. economy,[7] and some economists have argued for alternative ways for the United States to deal with its trade deficit with China. [5] [8] [9] [10] [11] In an April 2018 Forbes article, Harry G stated. Broadman, a former U.S. trade negotiator, agrees with the Trump administration`s core position that the Chinese do not respect fair, transparent and market-based rules for world trade, but he opposed his means of unilaterally enforcing tariffs and said the government should instead adopt a coalition-based approach. [317] In August 2019, Peter Navarro, Trump`s trade adviser, said tariffs did not harm Americans. Politifact called Navarros` claim “Pants on Fire.” [218] The Chinese government has challenged the forced transfer of intellectual property as a mandatory practice and has recognized the effects of domestic research and development in China.

[61] Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers said that in some technological fields, Chinese leaders are the result of a “huge public investment in basic research” and not a “theft” of Americans.