In One Sentence

• U.S. and Chinese delegations, led by Vice Premier He Lifeng and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent alongside US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, concluded two days of trade talks in Switzerland earlier this month.
• In their joint statement, both sides agreed to roll back tariffs on each other’s goods for a 90-day period.
• Specifically, the U.S. will suspend 24 percentage points of the tariff on Chinese goods for 90 days, retain a 10% rate, and remove the significant additional tariffs that were imposed on April 8, 2025, (Executive Orders 14259) and April 9 (EO 14266).
• The U.S. also slashed the de minimis tariffs on low-value Chinese shipments down to 30%. 
• Meanwhile, China will suspend 24 percentage points of its tariff for 90 days, keep a 10% rate, lift tariffs from Announcements No. 5 and No. 6 of 2025, and suspend a number of non-tariff countermeasures imposed since April 2.
• At a press briefing, He Lifeng described the meetings as in-depth, candid, and constructive, while President Trump in a social media post called the negotiations constructive and beneficial for both countries.

Mark the Essentials

• Notably, ahead of the Geneva talks, Beijing stated that it joined the negotiations at the request of the U.S., citing global expectations and China’s national interest, while warning Washington not to use the talks as a means of exerting pressure or coercion.
• For his part, President Trump stated ahead of the talks that he would consider lowering tariffs if the discussions were successful, adding that trade could form the basis for “greater friendship with China,” but only if China opens its market.
• Despite the breakthrough in Geneva, numerous issues remain to be sorted out between the U.S. and China. At the WTO session on April 30, the U.S. and its allies again criticized China for overcapacity and industrial subsidies, while China countered that the U.S. is the main force disrupting global trade. 
• At a recent U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission meeting, industry experts and representatives warned that China’s dominance in electrical grid components and critical minerals for renewable energy is unlikely to decline soon, even if the U.S. develops a strategy to counter Beijing’s industrial policies.
• Last month, President Trump signed an Executive Order aimed at countering China’s minerals sector dominance and reducing U.S. reliance on foreign suppliers by launching a broad initiative to accelerate deep-sea critical mineral extraction—particularly in the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf—through streamlined permitting, interagency coordination, and expanded export support. 
• U.S. industry groups have welcomed the end of de minimis treatment for Chinese goods and called for stronger enforcement, including expanding the ban to other countries, upgrading customs systems, and reinstating formal entry rules, warning that Chinese platforms may shift to alternative logistics models that still disadvantage U.S. businesses.

Keeping an Eye On…

• Evidently, the United States and China are back to their 90-Day trade theatrics. On May 12th, the two sides agreed to pause most of their stratospheric duties on one another (as well as some of China’s export controls) in order to negotiate the outlines, if not terms, of a new economic and trade relationship. August 12th, now, is the new due date to concentrate minds at both ends, as well as prepare scathing broadsides, full of lip and accusations, in the case of failure. 90-day pauses in U.S.-China trade ties under President Trump are hardly new; bilateral trade ties during Trump 1.0 were replete with 90-Day pauses, deadlines, and other artificially constructed timetables – almost all of which failed to deliver their requisite outcomes.
  
  In April 2017, the two sides hammered out a 100-Day action plan under the framework of the US-China Comprehensive Economic Dialogue that was created at the Trump-Xi Mar-a-Lago meeting that month. Positive movement on the action plan did not forestall the announcement of Section 301 tariffs on China in March 2018. That announcement of tariffs – unlawful as they were like the reciprocal tariffs, in turn set in train a 90-day window to resolve the U.S.’ grievances listed in its Section 301 investigation. Once again, notwithstanding positive movement including a joint consensus on May 19, 2018, on the outlines of a trade and economic deal (which was walked back subsequently due to in-fighting in the White House), the List 1 tranche of Section 301 tariffs began to be applied starting July 6, 2018. Lists 2, 3 and 4 would follow subsequently. In December 2018, following a successful high-stakes leaders meeting on the sidelines of the G20 Leaders’ Summit that saw President Trump pause his 25% tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods (the goods were subject to 10% tariffs at the time), yet another 90-day negotiation period was inaugurated. Again, despite significant positive movement during that period, the negotiations collapsed in May 2019, triggering in this case the extension of the trade war into the technology arena with the issuance of the expansive ICTS (Information and Communications Technology and Services) Order and the imposition of heavy-handed export controls on Huawei that same month. In January 2020, the two sides were finally able to eke out a Phase One agreement that contained a number of market purchase targets as well as a reduction of some non-tariff barriers. Had COVID struck a month or two earlier, even this Phase One negotiation would have fallen by the wayside.
  
  

  Given this dismal record of 90-day negotiations, should one hold out for a different result from the trade theatrics this time around? There are three reasons to be more hopeful than not. First, the two sides already have a ready-made deal in hand … which is the market purchases agreement that has been held in abeyance. It could serve as an ‘early harvest’ deal, and Treasury Secretary Bessent has alluded to it as such following his return from the Geneva talks with his Chinese counterparts. Second, the administration is barely 150 days into office. There is no rush for either side to push the other off-the-cliff this early. Finally, the economic stakes are altogether higher. During Trump 1.0, the additional tariffs to be applied – and which were applied – in case of failure were in the 10-25% range. Today, they are in the 100-125% range. And even if that triple-digit figure might seem a tad-bit exaggerated, the tariffs that would be applied today are over the 50% figure. At these rates, and with additional tariffs kicking-in under separate heads (Section 232, Biden era 301 tariffs, de minimis, etc.) a wholescale decoupling of the US-China trade and economic relationship could potentially be in order. All-the-more reason, then, to draw out the negotiations and bring them to a (sort-of) successful conclusion.

Expanded Reading

• US slashes ‘de minimis’ tariff on small China parcels to as low as 30%, Reuters, May 14, 2025
• U.S.-China trade war pushed global supply chain near breaking point, new data shows, CNBC, May 13, 2025
• Joint Statement on U.S.-China Economic and Trade Meeting in Geneva, The White House, May 12, 2025.
• U.S. and China cite progress in trade talks but release few details, NPR, May 11, 2025
• China Surrounded Xi’s Aide With Seasoned Experts To Seal US Deal, Bloomberg, May 14, 2025
• Trump’s China Truce On Tariffs Comes At Cost To U.S. Credibility, Council on Foreign Relations, May 13, 2025
• China Keeps Hold On Rare Earth Metals After Lifting Some U.S. Export Curbs, CNBC, May 15, 2025
• China ‘evaluating’ US offer to talk tariffs; warns against ‘extortion’, Reuters, May 2, 2025.
• Global trade war: tensions spill into WTO session over China overcapacity, Trump tariffs, South China Morning Post, April 30, 2025. 
• Trump signs executive order boosting deep-sea mining industry, Reuters, April 24, 2025.
• Trump ends small package tariff exemption while waiving customs rules, The Hill, May 2, 2025