web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "Trump, Donald J" (Page 137)

House Panel Investigates Obstruction Claims Against Trump Lawyers

WASHINGTON — The House Intelligence Committee is investigating whether lawyers tied to President Trump and his family helped obstruct the panel’s inquiry into Russian election interference by shaping false testimony, a series of previously undisclosed letters from its chairman show.

The line of inquiry stems from claims made by the president’s former personal lawyer and fixer, Michael D. Cohen, who told Congress earlier this year that the lawyers in question helped edit false testimony that he provided to Congress in 2017 about a Trump Tower project in Moscow. Mr. Cohen said they also dangled a potential pardon to try to ensure his loyalty.

In recent weeks, the committee sent lengthy document requests to four lawyers — Jay Sekulow, who represents the president; Alan S. Futerfas, who represents Donald Trump Jr.; Alan Garten, the top lawyer at the Trump Organization; and Abbe D. Lowell, who represents Ivanka Trump. The lawyers all took part in a joint defense agreement by the president’s allies to coordinate responses to inquiries by Congress and the Justice Department.

“Among other things, it appears that your clients may have reviewed, shaped and edited the false statement that Cohen submitted to the committee, including causing the omission of material facts,” the Intelligence Committee’s chairman, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, wrote to lawyers representing the four men in a May 3 letter obtained by The New York Times.

He continued: “In addition, certain of your clients may have engaged in discussions about potential pardons in an effort to deter one or more witnesses from cooperating with authorized investigations.”

[Read the letters here.]

The lawyers have so far balked at the committee’s requests. Mr. Schiff is prepared to issue a subpoena to compel cooperation if necessary, according to a senior committee official.

In a statement on Tuesday on behalf of the group, Patrick Strawbridge, who represents Mr. Sekulow, accused Mr. Schiff of ginning up a conflict.

“Instead of addressing important intelligence needs, the House Intelligence Committee appears to seek a truly needless dispute — this one with private attorneys — that would force them to violate privileges and ethical rules,” Mr. Strawbridge said. “As committed defense lawyers, we will respect the constitution and defend the attorney-client privilege — one of the oldest and most sacred privileges in the law.”

The lawyers raised other objections in response to Mr. Schiff’s initial request, writing that the inquiry “appears to be far afield from any proper legislative purpose.”

Westlake Legal Group trump-presidents-investigations-promo-1557500573411-articleLarge-v4 House Panel Investigates Obstruction Claims Against Trump Lawyers United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Russia Presidential Election of 2016 Politics and Government House Committee on Intelligence Cohen, Michael D (1966- )

Tracking 29 Investigations Related to Trump

Federal, state and congressional authorities are investigating Donald J. Trump’s businesses, campaign, inauguration and presidency.

Moreover, they wrote, Mr. Cohen is a witness of “questionable reliability” and his current lawyer, Lanny J. Davis, has acknowledged that Mr. Cohen himself wrote the lines in question “that formed the basis of his guilty plea for lying to Congress, and not anyone else.” (Mr. Cohen reported to federal prison earlier this month to begin a three-year term.)

It is unclear what evidence the committee may have beyond that shared by Mr. Cohen.

The claim that cooperation should come only on an inquiry with “proper legislative purpose” has been made repeatedly by the Trump administration as it denies House Democrats documents and access to witnesses for nearly a dozen continuing investigations. But Democrats say the House’s legitimate oversight role extends far beyond its legislative responsibilities.

The questions about Mr. Cohen’s false testimony and possible pardons are part of a broader inquiry by the committee into possible attempts to obstruct its investigation of Russian election interference and ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. Raising the possibility of legal exposure for lawyers in the case is certain to further inflame tensions between the president’s team and Democrats who control the House.

The two sides are already at a hostile stalemate over witnesses and documents that the House says it needs to conduct legitimate oversight. Mr. Trump and his allies have accused Democrats of abusing their own congressional powers to humiliate the president.

While it is a crime to obstruct a valid congressional investigation and to conspire to make false statements to Congress, it would most likely be a difficult case to bring against lawyers working in the case. Even if it could prove wrongdoing, the committee has little recourse beyond referring the case to the Justice Department, and the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has already declined to investigate or to charge the lawyers involved.

More likely, given the Trump administration’s across-the-board objection to Democrats’ requests, the line of inquiry could end up in court.

In a statement, Mr. Schiff indicated that he was trying to send a message to other potential witnesses.

“If any individual is allowed to lie to our committee or encourage others to do so, hide behind inapplicable privileges, or otherwise fail to provide anything less than full cooperation, other witnesses will be emboldened to similarly obstruct, both now and in the future,” he said.

Of the two topics raised by Mr. Schiff, the committee appears so far to have more evidence on the preparation of Mr. Cohen’s false statements than of possible pardons.

Mr. Cohen delivered a false statement to the Intelligence Committee in August 2017, when he said that the Trump Organization had stopped pursuing the Moscow project five months before it actually had. He asserted, falsely, that he had never discussed potential travel to Russia with Mr. Trump in connection to the project, and he played down the president’s role in and knowledge of the project, which took place during the course of the 2016 presidential campaign.

Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty in November 2018 to making false statements to Congress.

He later told the Intelligence Committee in closed testimony in February and March that lawyers in the joint defense agreement had reviewed and suggested edits to his statement. He also shared documents that he said showed some of the edits.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_151789902_ebc98695-da0a-4b40-b48f-aab972b04495-articleLarge House Panel Investigates Obstruction Claims Against Trump Lawyers United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Russia Presidential Election of 2016 Politics and Government House Committee on Intelligence Cohen, Michael D (1966- )

Representative Adam B. Schiff, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, is prepared to issue a subpoena to compel the lawyers to cooperate if necessary, according to a senior committee official.CreditTom Brenner for The New York Times

The Mueller report lays out several of Mr. Cohen’s claims. In it, he said that the lawyers had pushed him to remove a sentence disclosing that there had been “limited contacts with Russian government officials” in the course of the project.

Mr. Cohen also said that Mr. Sekulow told him that the details of an effort to set up a meeting between Mr. Trump and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia were “not relevant and should not be included in his statement to Congress,” the report said. Mr. Cohen and Mr. Sekulow spoke frequently before Mr. Cohen submitted his false statement, and Mr. Cohen said Mr. Sekulow told him he should not elaborate because the Moscow project had not progressed.

Other lawyers in the joint defense agreement also would have had access to the statement before its delivery. Vanity Fair later published the contents of emails between Mr. Cohen and his lawyer at the time, Stephen Ryan, in which Mr. Ryan detailed changes to the statement he said were requested by Mr. Lowell. The Times also reviewed the emails, which show Mr. Lowell asking that the statement assert that Ivanka Trump, the president’s elder daughter, had essentially no knowledge of the proposal. Mr. Cohen later told Congress that he had, in fact, briefed Mr. Trump’s children regularly on his progress.

A person familiar with what Mr. Cohen told the committee about the editing of the false statement said that at the time, Mr. Davis, who is Mr. Cohen’s lawyer, sent texts to Mr. Lowell to say that Mr. Cohen was not suggesting he had tried to advance false information. In the messages, Mr. Davis told Mr. Lowell that he would make that clear to House officials, the person said.

On Tuesday, Mr. Davis confirmed sending Mr. Lowell the texts, but he added that Mr. Lowell had made other suggested changes to Mr. Cohen’s 2017 false statement that were not incorporated into the final version. Mr. Davis said he thought Mr. Lowell believed the changes were truthful, but they were not, so they were not used.

The special counsel assigned Mr. Cohen’s claims on the false statement at least some credibility in his 448-page report, but he appeared to pass on examining them fully.

People close to Mr. Trump have said in the past that because Mr. Cohen was the primary person handling a possible Trump Tower deal in Moscow, no one else was privy to the details of conversations that he had, and so lawyers representing others in the Trump orbit did not know enough to challenge his account. The lawyers have also argued that congressional officials are seeking to get people to violate the confines of a joint defense agreement.

Mr. Schiff is taking a more aggressive approach and has argued that the committee is not obligated to honor attorney-client privilege, particularly if there is evidence that the lawyers aided a crime.

Mr. Cohen’s accusation about a possible pardon is murkier, and had also come under scrutiny by federal prosecutors in New York.

Essentially, Mr. Cohen has claimed that in April 2018, after the F.B.I. raided his home and office, lawyers connected to Mr. Trump held out the possibility of a presidential pardon if he remained loyal to members of the joint defense agreement.

But the lawyers involved, including Rudolph W. Giuliani and Robert J. Costello, have vigorously denied this account, saying that Mr. Giuliani said at the time that the president was then unwilling to discuss pardons.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump’s Tariffs, Once Seen as Leverage, May Be Here to Stay

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s tariffs were initially seen as a cudgel to force other countries to drop their trade barriers. But they increasingly look like a more permanent tool to shelter American industry, block imports and banish an undesirable trade deficit.

More than two years into the Trump administration, the United States has emerged as a nation with the highest tariff rate among developed countries, outranking Canada, Germany and France, as well as China, Russia and Turkey.

On Tuesday, the president continued to tout his trade war with China, saying that the 25 percent tariffs he imposed on $250 billion worth of Chinese goods would benefit the United States, and that he was looking “very strongly” at imposing additional levies on nearly every Chinese import.

“I think it’s going to turn out extremely well. We’re in a very strong position,” Mr. Trump said in remarks from the White House lawn. “Our economy is fantastic; theirs is not so good. We’ve gone up trillions and trillions of dollars since the election; they’ve gone way down since my election.”

He called the trade dispute “a little squabble” and suggested he was in no rush to end his fight, though he held out the possibility an agreement could be reached, saying: “They want to make a deal. It could absolutely happen.” Stock markets rebounded on Tuesday, after plunging on Monday as China and the United States resumed their tariff war.

Additional tariffs could be on the way. Mr. Trump faces a Friday deadline to determine whether the United States will proceed with his threat to impose global auto tariffs, a move that has been criticized by car companies and foreign policymakers. And despite complaints by Republican lawmakers and American companies, Mr. Trump’s global metal tariffs remain in place on Canada, Mexico, Europe and other allies.

The trade barriers are putting the United States, previously a steadfast advocate of global free trade, in an unfamiliar position. The country now has the highest overall trade-weighted tariff rate at 4.2 percent, higher than any of the Group of 7 industrialized nations, according to Torsten Slok, the chief economist of Deutsche Bank Securities. That is now more than twice as high as the rate for Canada, Britain, Italy, Germany and France, and higher than most emerging markets, including Russia, Turkey and even China, Mr. Slok said.

[A trade war with China could be long and painful.]

The shift is having consequences for an American economy that is dependent on global trade, including multinational companies like Boeing, General Motors, Apple, Caterpillar and other businesses that source components from abroad and want access to growing markets overseas.

While trade accounts for a smaller percentage of the American economy than in most other countries — just 27 percent in 2017, compared with 38 percent for China and 87 percent for Germany, according to World Bank data — it is still a critical driver of jobs and economic growth.

For now, the American economy remains strong, with rising wages and the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years. But with less trade, American jobs up and down the value chain that are seemingly unrelated to importing and exporting goods could suffer, including research and development, retail and marketing products.

Douglas Irwin, a trade historian at Dartmouth College, said Mr. Trump’s tariff battle with China was bringing about “a new status quo for the world economy.”

“If we do have this consensus that we want to isolate ourselves from China, that’s a big historic shift in U.S. trade policy,” Mr. Irwin said. “We’ve moved away from tariffs as a bargaining chip to get a better deal to tariffs as a means to an end to decouple the economies.”

Mr. Trump and his economic advisers say the administration’s trade policy is aiding the American economy, companies and consumers. And despite the tough approach, the administration continues to insist its goal is to strike trade agreements that give American businesses better trade terms overseas.

At a briefing last week, Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, praised the president’s trade policies for helping economic growth thus far and said the administration supports “free and fair reciprocal trade.”

But if the goal really is freer trade, the administration has never been further from achieving that goal than it is today, said Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

“They’re heading in the opposite direction,” Mr. Bown said.

Beyond a minor update to the United States agreement with South Korea, no other free trade deals have been finalized. Mr. Trump’s revisions to the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico still await passage in Congress, while trade talks with the European Union and Japan have been troubled from the start, with governments squabbling over the scope of the agreement.

The easier explanation, said Michael Strain, the director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is to take the president at his word that he is a protectionist.

“Those are the words they’re using, and those are the actions they’re taking,” he said.

In remarks this week, Mr. Trump said companies that did not want to pay the tariffs could shift production out of China and into the United States or another country that has not been hit with tariffs. While there are signs that this shift is happening, it seems to be benefiting countries like Mexico and Vietnam rather than the United States.

It remains to be seen whether the president’s actions will precipitate a broader shift away from global integration that might echo around the world and outlast the Trump administration.

Video

Westlake Legal Group 14dc-trade-vid-videoSixteenByNine3000 Trump’s Tariffs, Once Seen as Leverage, May Be Here to Stay United States Politics and Government United States Economy Trump, Donald J Steel and Iron Protectionism (Trade) North American Free Trade Agreement International Trade and World Market Customs (Tariff)

President Trump on Tuesday defended his actions in the U.S.-China trade war, telling reporters at the White House that “we’re in a very strong position.”CreditCreditTom Brenner for The New York Times

Mr. Trump came into office fiercely critical of the failure of past administrations and global bodies like the World Trade Organization for failing to police China’s unfair trade practices. He withdrew the United States from multilateral efforts like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a multicountry trade deal negotiated by President Barack Obama, and the Paris climate accord.

That shift has created an opening for other countries to step forward as global leaders, including Europe, Japan and China, despite its position as one of the world’s most controversial economic actors. On Tuesday, China submitted its proposals for overhauling the World Trade Organization, including broadening the privileges of developed countries, a status that China claims for itself.

Advocates of free trade fear that governments in India, China, South Africa and elsewhere might find Mr. Trump’s model of protectionism appealing and erect even higher barriers to foreign companies.

While the United States and China could still strike a trade deal that would roll back many of their tariffs, that likelihood has appeared to diminish in recent weeks.

Progress toward a deal came to a sudden halt this month when China backtracked on certain commitments and Mr. Trump threatened to move ahead with higher tariffs.

“We had a deal that was very close, and then they broke it,” he said on Tuesday.

The two sides continue to disagree over whether the deal’s provisions must be enshrined in China’s laws. But they are also arguing over Mr. Trump’s tariffs, which were intended to prod the Chinese to agree to more favorable trade terms for the United States. China insists those tariffs must come off once a deal is reached, but the Trump administration wants some to remain in place, to ensure China abides by its commitments.

In an interview on Tuesday on CNBC, Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, supported the administration’s tactics.

“Ideally, you wouldn’t have tariffs,” he said. But the United States already faces “all kinds of impediments” to gaining access to the Chinese marketplace, including tariffs, subsidization of industries and theft of intellectual property.

“We already have a series of hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese penalties against the United States which are threatening our long-term viability,” Mr. Rubio said.

Canada and Mexico have repeatedly pressed the administration to lift its tariffs on steel and aluminum now that negotiations over the Nafta revision are done. The three countries signed the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement in November, but the pact awaits passage in all three legislatures.

The Trump administration still views the tariffs as a source of leverage in case it needs to demand final changes to the deal from Canada and Mexico. But Canadian and Mexican officials — as well as many in Congress — say the levies are actually an impediment because all three legislatures will refuse to finalize the deal while they are in place.

A similar standoff could soon unfold with the European Union, which Mr. Trump has accused of being a “brutal trading partner” and being “tougher than China.”

The president, who wants Europe to open its markets to American farmers and companies, has already imposed tariffs on European metals and is threatening to levy a 25 percent tax on imports of European cars and car parts if the bloc does not give the United States better trade terms.

Europe has absorbed Mr. Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs without too much damage. But car tariffs would strike the most important industry in Germany, which has the Continent’s biggest economy. European officials would regard car tariffs as a breach of a truce they worked out last year with Mr. Trump, and they have said they would refuse to negotiate as long as car tariffs were in place.

Cecilia Malmstrom, the European commissioner for trade, repeated on Monday that the European Union had prepared a list of American products worth $22.5 billion — including ketchup, suitcases and tractors — that would face immediate retaliatory tariffs.

“We’re prepared for the worst,” Ms. Malmstrom said in an interview with the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper in Germany.

European officials still hold out hope that Mr. Trump will see them as allies and not geopolitical rivals like the Chinese. And he could ultimately delay the decision and extend the Friday deadline for countries that are in trade talks with the United States.

But the president shows no signs of backing away from his stance that tariffs have helped the United States.

On Tuesday morning, Mr. Trump posted on Twitter that tariffs had rebuilt America’s steel industry and were encouraging companies to leave China, making it “more competitive” for buyers in the United States.

“China buys MUCH less from us than we buy from them, by almost 500 Billion Dollars, so we are in a fantastic position,” Mr. Trump tweeted. “Make your product at home in the USA and there is no Tariff.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Stocks Rebound as U.S.-China Trade War Enters New Stage

Westlake Legal Group 14markets-promo-alt-facebookJumbo Stocks Rebound as U.S.-China Trade War Enters New Stage Xi Jinping Trump, Donald J Stocks and Bonds International Trade and World Market Economic Conditions and Trends Customs (Tariff) China

Stocks jumped on Tuesday, rebounding from their biggest loss in more than four months and giving investors a reprieve from the waves of selling that have characterized trading so far in May.

Investors are trying to adjust to the ratcheting up of trade tension between the United States and China, and assess the impact of the continuing dispute on the global economy, corporate profits and consumer spending. It is an abrupt change for traders who, as recently as last month, were anticipating that the two sides were close to reaching a deal.

On Monday, the S&P 500 suffered its steepest drop since early January, after Beijing said it would raise tariffs on American-made goods in retaliation for a similar move from the United States.

Stocks on Tuesday rebounded from that plunge. The S&P rose 0.8 percent, while European markets were also higher. Asian stock markets had ended the day slightly lower.

[Read more about the reasons investors have been rattled by the return of trade tension.]

Still, the S&P 500 has dropped more than 3 percent so far in May, and even amid Tuesday’s recovery there were signs that investors continue to worry about the costs of the prolonging trade fight. Retail stocks were among the worst performers of the day, and Ralph Lauren suffered one of the steepest drops, despite posting better-than-expected quarterly earnings results.

In part, the retail slump reflects the fact that the next round of tariffs that the Trump administration is now considering imposing on Chinese imports includes a range of consumer products, from shoes to clothing to smartphones. Taxes on those products could hurt either consumer spending or retail profits if companies try to absorb the higher import costs.

In a conference call with analysts after the release of the company’s quarterly results, Jane Nielsen, Ralph Lauren’s chief financial officer, said that the company was “taking a more cautious approach to inventories, especially in light of the dynamic trade environment.”

According to JPMorgan Chase analysts, roughly one-third of Ralph Lauren’s products are sourced from China.

Most economists think that the direct impact of the tariff fight between China and the United States will be limited. For example, Barclays economists say that if tariffs are indeed extended by the administration, that could lower the level of gross domestic product by as much as 0.3 percentage points over the long term.

But such tidy estimates mask a range of uncertainties. The costs to consumers — who are set to bear the brunt of the next round of American tariffs on Chinese goods — could be considerably higher than the overall impact on the economy.

Also, economic impact estimates focus tightly on the direct effect of the tariffs themselves and shed no light on indirect factors such as a potential decline in consumer and corporate confidence, or a downturn in financial markets, all of which could also weigh on growth.

A small cut in growth might not seem like a major concern, given the considerable momentum the American economy appears to have, but most economists expect the pace of economic growth to slow to below 2 percent in 2020, according to consensus economic estimates compiled by FactSet, a data provider.

“The more you put tariffs on, the harder it is for everyone to get out of the way,” said Michael Gapen, chief United States economist at Barclays. “If we’re all right and growth is slowing down toward 2” percent, he said, “then this starts to matter a lot.”

On Tuesday, investors seemed suddenly less concerned, even with little in the way of positive developments on the trade front.

President Trump, who has long accused China of unfair trade practices in justifying his push for tariffs, reiterated that argument while speaking to reporters outside the White House on Tuesday morning. He continued to express confidence that the administration would make a favorable trade deal.

“I think it’s going to turn out extremely well,” Mr. Trump said. “We’re in a very strong position.”

He played down the conflict as a “little squabble with China,” and denied that talks between the countries had ended.

But public comments from Beijing also suggested that the uncertainty for investors was far from over.

“China does not want or wish for a trade war, but it is by no means afraid of one,” Geng Shuang, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said at a news briefing. “If someone brings the war to our doorstep, we will fight it to the end.”

Still, the tone across financial markets was positive.

The recovery on Wall Street was broad, with energy companies, semiconductor makers and other tech and industrial firms leading the American market higher. The price of several commodities, which had also been hit by worsening trade tensions on Monday, recovered too. Soybeans, a key American export to China, rose. Prices for copper, an industrial metal whose prices are considered good gauges of expectations for Chinese economic growth, also climbed.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The New New World: In China, Some Fear the End of ‘Chimerica’

Wu Shichun is one of countless Chinese entrepreneurs who over the past four decades have prospered from access to American customers and money.

Today, as the American government threatens to take that away, the serial entrepreneur and venture capital investor is fundamentally rethinking how he does business.

One of his portfolio companies designs and makes fashion products in China, then sells to American consumers on Amazon.com. Another, a vape device maker, sells most of its products in the United States. The third, which makes metal materials for electronic manufacturers, exports 40 percent of its production there. All three would be hit by new American tariffs.

“From now on I’ll have to invest in companies that focus on the Chinese market,” said Mr. Wu, 42.

“I hope China and the U.S. can find a better way to coexist,” he said. “It doesn’t have to be mutually destructive.”

The Chinese government has struck a defiant tone since President Trump ratcheted up the trade war on Friday by raising tariffs on Chinese exports worth $200 billion a year. “If the U.S. wants to talk, our door is open,” said a commentary on state-controlled China Central Television on Monday night that quickly went viral. “If the U.S. wants to fight, we’ll be with them till the end.”

Many entrepreneurs and intellectuals, by contrast, are hoping for a deal. China’s rise out of the stark terror of the Cultural Revolution was fueled in part from connections to the United States, an early diplomatic partner that offered investment, markets and opportunity. There’s even a word going around the Chinese internet for the tight economic bonds that have formed between the world’s two largest economies: “Chimerica.”

The trade war is taking direct aim at Chimerica. New tariffs, if they stick, threaten to cut off a big market for many Chinese companies.

ImageWestlake Legal Group 14NEWWORLD-2-articleLarge The New New World: In China, Some Fear the End of ‘Chimerica’ Xi Jinping United States Politics and Government United States Economy United States Trump, Donald J Politics and Government International Trade and World Market Foreign Investments Economic Conditions and Trends Customs (Tariff) China

President Trump and President Xi Jinping of China in Beijing in November 2017.CreditDoug Mills/The New York Times

Now many people in China are wondering what will happen if the countries decouple. They question whether the country can continue its miraculous rise as borders and barriers go up.

“From the day we were born, my generation has always seen the country’s economy heading for the better,” Feng Dahui, an early Alibaba employee and an internet entrepreneur in the city of Hangzhou, wrote on his timeline on WeChat, the Chinese social media service, on Monday evening.

“We’ve experienced the internet revolution and enjoyed the benefits of globalization,” he continued. “Now this type of optimism seems to be deserting us. Everything seems to be ending abruptly.”

Their concerns are unlikely to sway the Chinese government. Most political analysts believe that the only effective pressure will have to come from within the Chinese Communist Party’s leadership, and official voices have been uniformly strident. Negative commentaries have been stricken from China’s heavily censored internet.

Still, some entrepreneurs are expressing their worries.

Xiao Yu, founder of the luxury e-commerce company OFashion, said his business, which sells luxury goods from Europe and the United States to Chinese consumers, saw growth slow in the second half of last year partly because of the trade war. While only about 10 percent of its merchandise comes from American brands like Michael Kors or Coach, the trade war has hit China’s stock market and hurt consumer confidence.

The trade war could jeopardize his dreams of raising money from American investors and perhaps even taking his start-up public on an American stock exchange, he said.

“As an entrepreneur, our fate is tightly bound to the country,” Mr. Xiao said. He hopes and is confident that the two countries can reach a deal.

“China and the U.S. don’t have to have strained relations,” he said.

Many also appear worried that the trade war and the government’s tightening control over the private sector could halt or even reverse its progress. In a country only a couple generations removed from starvation, the possibility doesn’t seem far-fetched to many. One 2017 post online, called “A Guide to Eating Tree Bark,” described how people in the Chinese region of Inner Mongolia survived during the starvation of the Great Leap Forward. It has recently gone viral again, with more than 100,000 page views.

The two sides have plenty of reasons to distrust each other. The United States blames China for heavy job losses, theft of corporate secrets and cheating at the rules of global trade. China credits the hard work and sacrifices of its people for its success and sees the trade war as driven by American fears of a prosperous Chinese nation.

But the doves in China say both sides benefit from the relationship more than they admit. Foreign investors were early backers and inspirations for Chinese internet giants like Alibaba and Tencent, for example. And many American companies and investors have profited handsomely from China’s rise.

Those hoping for a deal worry that the Chinese government has fundamentally misjudged the Trump administration. At three top top-level economic and monetary meetings in April, an economist at a Chinese investment bank said, government officials sent the signals that the leadership was optimistic about a trade deal.

Some people are resurrecting old articles online about the Chinese-American relationship that are now going viral. One of them was a January speech by Li Ruogu, the former chairman of the Export-Import Bank of China and former deputy governor of China’s central bank. Mr. Li argued that many Chinese, including some senior officials, didn’t realize that the relations had shifted fundamentally. The conflict wasn’t about the United States being threatened by China’s growth, he said, but by its vision of state-led capitalism.

“This is the conflict of systems,” he wrote. “It won’t end easily.”

Another popular, and subsequently censored, article had the headline: “The Reasons Behind the Chimerica Breakup.” The popularity of the article, whose author is anonymous, reflects a growing realization that the two countries’ conflicts go beyond trade and may not have an easy solution.

The article argues that China’s system of low human rights-based mercantilistic state capitalism negatively affected the pricing and wage structures in the United States and other developed economies. Now the United States wants China to change its economic growth model, the author argued, while China only wants to buy more American products to solve short-term trade imbalances.

“Chimerica parted ways on May 10,” the author wrote. “Now it’s time to decide whether to adopt the U.S. rules or the Chinese rules.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Why the U.S.-China Trade War Could Be Long and Painful: No Off-Ramps

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_139821900_5eca2c3c-1eb5-424f-8be8-ede97e070c7b-articleLarge Why the U.S.-China Trade War Could Be Long and Painful: No Off-Ramps Xi Jinping United States International Relations United States Trump, Donald J International Trade and World Market Customs (Tariff) China

U.S. President Donald Trump and China’s President Xi Jinping at a meeting in Beijing in 2017. This time, both leaders seem headed toward confrontation.CreditDamir Sagolj/Reuters

Just two weeks ago, the United States and China seemed to be gliding toward a trade deal meant to resolve tensions between the world’s two largest economies.

But the breakdown in talks since then — including the United States raising tariffs to 25 percent on $200 billion of Chinese imports and threatening to tax an additional $300 billion — worries people who study international economic diplomacy.

That’s because both the United States and China seem to be digging into their positions in ways that will be hard to resolve with the kinds of mutual face-saving that typically turns high-stakes negotiations into deals.

To use a common negotiating metaphor, it is not clear what the off-ramps are that might allow a de-escalation and prevent a major trade war that would prove costly to both nations.

In effect, President Trump appears to view continuing tension with China as good for him politically and has said, contrary to the view of mainstream economists, that tariffs are a reason for the United States’ recent economic good fortune.

China’s leaders may not reveal their thinking in real time on Twitter, but they have signaled that many of the concessions the United States wants would require China to sacrifice core parts of its economic strategy and national sovereignty — in particular its ambitions to lead in the high-tech industries of the future.

“Each side has dug itself into some fairly deep holes such that it will be difficult to emerge from,” said Douglas Rediker, chairman of International Capital Strategies and a former U.S. representative to the International Monetary Fund. As is often the case in negotiations, the pathway to a deal may rest in “constructive ambiguity” that both sides can present to their domestic audiences as a win.

“Do I believe there’s enough room to find common ground?” Mr. Rediker said. “Yes, but only based on this ambiguity that doesn’t necessarily resolve the issues in one party’s favor or another.”

Both sides have taken subtle steps to allow time for last-ditch efforts at some agreement. China sent a senior negotiator to Washington last week despite the breakdown in talks, and it delayed the start of its retaliatory tariffs on American imports until June 1; the United States applied the newest wave of higher tariffs based on when ships containing the affected goods arrive, adding a few weeks in which a reversal could be hammered out.

And President Trump and President Xi Jinping of China could meet at the G20 summit in late June in Osaka, Japan, which would be an opportunity for de-escalation at the highest levels.

But open lines of communication and time to work won’t by themselves solve the problem of how to finesse some mutually agreeable deal — particularly given that both countries view this negotiation as resetting their economic relationship in ways that would have long-lasting consequences.

Add in Mr. Trump’s tendency to view every negotiation through a zero-sum prism, and it may be hard to find a pathway for both parties to go home able to proclaim victory.

When the negotiations seemed to be going well a few weeks ago, “I thought we were going toward constructive ambiguity,” said Mary E. Lovely, an economist and trade expert at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School.

The United States is demanding that China codify rules to protect American companies and their technology doing business in China into law. Chinese negotiators now reject that possibility (American officials have said they earlier agreed to those provisions).

“It looks like there was a level of specificity that China wasn’t willing to accept and a level of ambiguity that the Trump administration wasn’t willing to accept,” Ms. Lovely said. “It looks like the Chinese are firm that there are some areas where they are not willing to go, that they see as disrespectful.”

If the escalation now being signaled by both sides goes into force, it will mean Americans face higher prices for a wide range of the goods they buy, and certain American manufacturers will face less demand for their products. Already, American farmers are suffering amid reduced Chinese demand for American soybeans and other products. The Chinese manufacturing sector is hurting as well — and is likely to suffer further if tariffs reduce American demand for their products or drive relocation of production to other countries.

Ultimately the question becomes how much of that pain each side will be willing to endure, and whether the two nations’ leaders feel a sense of urgency to each help the other save face domestically.

Things can change quickly. In a different sphere, for example, Mr. Trump went from threatening North Korea with nuclear annihilation to acting like old friends practically overnight.

But given where things stand, it may take that kind of surprising reset between two top leaders, built on personal relationships, rather than the slow grind of hammering out an agreement that is more typical of economic diplomacy.

“The off-ramps are tricky here because the president believes this is good policy and the Chinese are loath to cave on it,” said Jay Shambaugh, a professor of international economics at George Washington University and director of the Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institution. “It’s not abundantly clear how you climb down without any damage.”

The question for the weeks and months ahead is how much damage each side will tolerate before rethinking some of those basic assumptions and deciding that they don’t want to dig in quite so hard, after all.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

White House Reviews Military Plans Against Iran, in Echoes of Iraq War

WASHINGTON — At a meeting of President Trump’s top national security aides last Thursday, Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan presented an updated military plan that envisions sending as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East should Iran attack American forces or accelerate work on nuclear weapons, administration officials said.

[To follow new military deployments to the Middle East, sign up for the weekly At War newsletter.]

The revisions were ordered by hard-liners led by John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser. They do not call for a land invasion of Iran, which would require vastly more troops, officials said.

The development reflects the influence of Mr. Bolton, one of the administration’s most virulent Iran hawks, whose push for confrontation with Tehran was ignored more than a decade ago by President George W. Bush.

It is highly uncertain whether Mr. Trump, who has sought to disentangle the United States from Afghanistan and Syria, ultimately would send so many American forces back to the Middle East.

It is also unclear whether the president has been briefed on the number of troops or other details in the plans. On Monday, asked about if he was seeking regime change in Iran, Mr. Trump said: “We’ll see what happens with Iran. If they do anything, it would be a very bad mistake.”

There are sharp divisions in the administration over how to respond to Iran at a time when tensions are rising about Iran’s nuclear policy and its intentions in the Middle East.

Some senior American officials said the plans, even at a very preliminary stage, show how dangerous the threat from Iran has become. Others, who are urging a diplomatic resolution to the current tensions, said it amounts to a scare tactic to warn Iran against new aggressions.

European allies who met with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday said that they worry that tensions between Washington and Tehran could boil over, possibly inadvertently.

More than a half-dozen American national security officials who have been briefed on details of the updated plans agreed to discuss them with The New York Times on the condition of anonymity. Spokesmen for Mr. Shanahan and Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declined to comment.

The size of the force involved has shocked some who have been briefed on them. The 120,000 troops would approach the size of the American force that invaded Iraq in 2003.

Deploying such a robust air, land and naval force would give Tehran more targets to strike, and potentially more reason to do so, risking entangling the United States in a drawn out conflict. It also would reverse years of retrenching by the American military in the Middle East that began with President Barack Obama’s withdrawal of troops from Iraq in 2011.

But two of the American national security officials said Mr. Trump’s announced drawdown in December of American forces in Syria, and the diminished naval presence in the region, appear to have emboldened some leaders in Tehran and convinced the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps that the United States has no appetite for a fight with Iran.

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_154196253_287af293-9304-475d-bb11-6c5c64b1fb48-articleLarge White House Reviews Military Plans Against Iran, in Echoes of Iraq War United States Politics and Government United States International Relations United States Defense and Military Forces Trump, Donald J Shanahan, Patrick M (1962- ) Pompeo, Mike National Security Council Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Iran Bolton, John R

Since John R. Bolton became the national security adviser in April 2018, he has intensified the Trump administration’s policy of isolating and pressuring Iran.CreditTom Brenner for The New York Times

Several oil tankers were reportedly attacked or sabotaged off the coast of the United Arab Emirates over the weekend, raising fears that shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf could become flash points. “It’s going to be a bad problem for Iran if something happens,” Mr. Trump said on Monday, asked about the episode.

Emirati officials are investigating the apparent sabotage, and American officials suspect that Iran was involved. Several officials cautioned, however, that there is not yet any definitive evidence linking Iran or its proxies to the reported attacks. An Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman called it a “regretful incident,” according to a state news agency.

In Brussels, Mr. Pompeo met with the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany, cosignatories of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, as well as with the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini. He did not speak to the media, but the European officials said they had urged restraint upon Washington, fearing accidental escalation that could lead to conflict with Iran.

“We are very worried about the risk of a conflict happening by accident, with an escalation that is unintended really on either side,” said Jeremy Hunt, the British foreign secretary.

The Iranian government has not threatened violence recently, but last week, President Hassan Rouhani said Iran would walk away from parts of the 2015 nuclear deal it reached with world powers. Mr. Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement a year ago, but European nations have urged Iran to stick with the deal and ignore Mr. Trump’s provocations.

The high-level review of the Pentagon’s plans was presented during a meeting about broader Iran policy. It was held days after what the Trump administration described, without evidence, as new intelligence indicating that Iran was mobilizing proxy groups in Iraq and Syria to attack American forces.

As a precaution, the Pentagon has moved an aircraft carrier, B-52 bombers, a Patriot missile interceptor battery and more naval firepower to the gulf region.

At last week’s meeting, Mr. Shanahan gave an overview of the Pentagon’s planning, then turned to General Dunford to detail various force options, officials said. The uppermost option called for deploying 120,000 troops, which would take weeks or months to complete.

Among those attending Thursday’s meeting were Mr. Shanahan; Mr. Bolton; General Dunford; Gina Haspel, the C.I.A. director; and Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence.

“The president has been clear, the United States does not seek military conflict with Iran, and he is open to talks with Iranian leadership,” Garrett Marquis, a National Security Council spokesman, said Monday in an email. “However, Iran’s default option for 40 years has been violence, and we are ready to defend U.S. personnel and interests in the region.”

The reduction of forces in the Middle East in recent years has been propelled by a new focus on China, Russia and a so-called Great Powers competition. The most recent National Defense Strategy — released before Mr. Bolton joined the Trump administration — concluded that while the Middle East remains important, and Iran is a threat to American allies, the United States must do more to ensure a rising China does not upend the world order.

As recently as late April, an American intelligence analysis indicated that Iran had no short-term desire to provoke a conflict. But new intelligence reports, including intercepts, imagery and other information, have since indicated that Iran was building up its proxy forces’ readiness to fight and was preparing them to attack American forces in the region.

The new intelligence reports surfaced on the afternoon of May 3, Mr. Shanahan told Congress last week. On May 5, Mr. Bolton announced the first of new deployments to the Persian Gulf, including bombers and an aircraft carrier.

Members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which was designated a terrorist group by the Trump administration last month.CreditAgence France-Presse — Getty Images

It is not clear to American intelligence officials what changed Iran’s posture. But intelligence and Defense Department officials said American sanctions have been working better than originally expected, proving far more crippling to the Iranian economy — especially after a clampdown on all oil exports that was announced last month.

Also in April, the State Department designated the Revolutionary Guards a foreign terrorist organization over objections from Pentagon and intelligence officials who feared reprisals from the Iranian military.

While much of the new intelligence appears to have focused on Iran readying its proxy forces, officials said they believed the most likely cause of a conflict will follow a provocative act, or outright attack, by the Revolutionary Guards’ navy. The Guards’ fleet of small boats has a history of approaching American Navy ships at high speed. Revolutionary Guards commanders have precarious control over their ill-disciplined naval forces.

Part of the updated planning appears to focus on what military action the United States might take if Iran resumes its nuclear fuel production, which has been frozen under the 2015 agreement. It would be difficult for the Trump administration to make a case that the United States was under imminent nuclear peril; Iran shipped 97 percent of its fuel out of the country in 2016, and currently does not have enough to make a bomb.

That could change if Iran resumes enriching uranium. But it would take a year or more to build up a significant quantity of material, and longer to fashion it into a weapon. That would allow, at least in theory, plenty of time for the United States to develop a response — like a further cutoff of oil revenues, covert action or military strikes.

The previous version of the Pentagon’s war plan included a classified subset code-named Nitro Zeus, a cyberoperation that called for unplugging Iran’s major cities, it power grid and its military.

The idea was to use cyberweapons to paralyze Iran in the opening hours of any conflict, in hopes that it would obviate the need to drop any bombs or conduct a traditional attack. That plan required extensive presence inside Iran’s networks — called “implants” or “beacons” — that would pave the way for injecting destabilizing malware into Iranian systems.

Two officials said those plans have been constantly updated in recent years.

But even a cyberattack, without dropping bombs, carries significant risk. Iran has built up a major corps of its own, one that successfully attacked financial markets in 2012, a casino in Las Vegas and a range of military targets. American intelligence officials told Congress in January that Iranian hackers are now considered sophisticated operators who are increasingly capable of striking United States targets.

Since Mr. Bolton became national security adviser in April 2018, he has intensified the Trump administration’s policy of isolating and pressuring Iran. The animus against Iran’s leaders dates back at least to his days as an official in the George W. Bush administration. Later, as a private citizen, Mr. Bolton called for military strikes on Iran, as well as regime change.

The newly updated plans were not the first time during the Trump administration that Mr. Bolton has sought military options to strike Iran.

This year, Defense Department and senior American officials said Mr. Bolton sought similar guidance from the Pentagon last year, after Iranian-backed militants fired three mortars or rockets into an empty lot on the grounds of the United States Embassy in Baghdad in September.

In response to Mr. Bolton’s request, which alarmed Jim Mattis, then the defense secretary, the Pentagon offered some general options, including a cross-border airstrike on an Iranian military facility that would have been mostly symbolic.

But Mr. Mattis and other military leaders adamantly opposed retaliation for the Baghdad attack, successfully arguing that it was insignificant.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Stocks Stabilize as U.S.-China Trade War Enters New Stage

Westlake Legal Group 14markets-promo-facebookJumbo Stocks Stabilize as U.S.-China Trade War Enters New Stage Xi Jinping Trump, Donald J Stocks and Bonds International Trade and World Market Economic Conditions and Trends Customs (Tariff) China

Financial markets showed signs of stabilizing on Tuesday, one day after China’s retaliatory tariffs against imports from the United States rattled Wall Street.

Still, China’s public comments suggested the uncertainty is far from over.

Asian markets fell broadly but more modestly than Wall Street. European markets opened somewhat higher. Futures markets were predicting that Wall Street would open higher after Monday’s 2.4 percent decline.

China on Monday announced plans to raise tariffs on American-made goods worth nearly $60 billion a year, after the United States raised tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports. The dueling tariff increases will not hit the global economy right away, as they will not come into full force for several weeks. President Trump said on Monday that he would meet with Xi Jinping, China’s top leader, next month in Japan.

The prospects of a deal from that meeting isn’t clear. On Tuesday, the Chinese government reaffirmed its defiant stance.

“China does not want or wish for a trade war, but it is by no means afraid of one,” said Geng Shuang, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry, at a daily news briefing. “If someone brings the war to our doorstep, we will fight it to the end.

Hong Kong, which was closed on Monday for a holiday, led the declines in Asia. The Hang Seng Index fell 1.5 percent.

In China, the Shanghai Composite Index and the Shenzhen Composite Index both fell 0.7 percent.

The Nikkei 225 index in Japan fell 0.6 percent.

South Korea bucked the regional trend, with the Kospi index rising 0.2 percent.

European markets opened higher. In Paris, the CAC 40 index was 0.8 percent higher, while the DAX in Germany was 0.4 percent higher.

In London, the FTSE 100 index opened 0.6 percent higher.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Toys, Phones and Sneakers: The Chinese Goods Trump Wants to Tax Next

The Trump administration can’t shield consumers from its trade war anymore.

Until now, President Trump’s tariffs on a total of $250 billion in Chinese imports have largely hit intermediate and capital goods — items typically bought by businesses, not shoppers.

That will change if Mr. Trump follows through with his threat to tax nearly every product China sends to the United States, or roughly $300 billion worth of goods. The United States trade representative on Monday detailed a list of what would face a tax of as much as 25 percent, which includes nearly 4,000 product categories.

Mr. Trump said on Monday he had not yet decided whether to impose the tariffs, but his administration has begun the formal process necessary for the United States to make good on his threat.

Officials said that the new batch of tariffs “covers essentially all products not currently covered” by Mr. Trump’s existing tariffs on Chinese imports, but that the list “excludes pharmaceuticals, certain pharmaceutical inputs, select medical goods, rare earth materials, and critical minerals.”

So what would get hit with tariffs? The list reads like a shopping list for Target or Walmart, including toys, shoes, coffee makers and watches. Smartphones, photocopiers and video game consoles will face a tax. Also included are guns, fireworks, backgammon, Christmas decorations, practical joke toys, furs (with or without paws) and merry-go-rounds.

The list includes nearly 40 Chinese import categories that Americans collectively spent $1 billion or more on in 2017, according to government statistics. The largest among those, at $44.5 billion, are cellphones, followed by laptops at $37.2 billion and toys at $12.2 billion.

Here’s a quick scan of other consumer favorites that will be subject to tariffs if Mr. Trump follows through:

  • Kitchenware

  • LED lamps

  • Flags

  • Microwave ovens

  • Curtains and drapes

  • Coffee makers

  • Hair dryers

  • Bed linens

  • Sweaters

  • Shoes, including golf shoes, boots, running shoes and other footwear

  • Bras

  • Gloves

  • Sunglasses

  • Wigs and facial hair made of human hair

  • T-shirts

  • Track suits

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_154606857_0afe836a-d9d0-427a-b6fa-bf11a1e65d12-articleLarge Toys, Phones and Sneakers: The Chinese Goods Trump Wants to Tax Next United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J International Trade and World Market Inflation (Economics) Customs (Tariff)

An Everwin factory in Dongguan, Guangdong Province, China. Everwin produces cases for phones, tablets and laptops for Apple, Samsung and other tech companies. CreditAleksandar Plavevski/EPA, via Shutterstock

  • Smartphones, like iPhones

  • Flat-panel televisions

  • Copiers and fax machines

  • Video cameras

  • Lithium ion batteries

  • Keyboards

  • Loudspeakers

  • Golf clubs

  • Water skis, surf boards and other water sport equipment

  • Bicycle parts

  • Fishing rods

  • Military rifles, shotguns and their parts

  • Rocket launchers and flame throwers

  • Greeting cards

  • Artificial flowers

  • Flashlights

  • Pens

Mr. Trump has insisted that the tariffs will not raise prices for consumers, saying that China will bear the brunt of the taxes, a view that many economists dispute.

On Monday, Mr. Trump encouraged companies to avoid tariffs by moving production out of China and into the United States or a country like Vietnam. He said the next round of tariffs represented “a tremendous amount of money that would come into our country.”

Shifting production across borders would be difficult for some consumer-facing companies to do quickly, said Alan Detmeister, an economist at UBS and former head of the price and wage section at the Federal Reserve.

That means consumers could have little choice but to pay more for those goods, or buy fewer of them. It’s likely that the result will be higher consumer inflation. Goldman Sachs economists expect 25 percent tariffs on remaining Chinese goods could push up inflation — now at 1.6 percent on a core basis — by half a percentage point.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trade Dispute Between U.S. and China Deepens as Beijing Retaliates

Westlake Legal Group 13DC-TRADE-facebookJumbo-v3 Trade Dispute Between U.S. and China Deepens as Beijing Retaliates United States Economy Trump, Donald J Kudlow, Lawrence A International Trade and World Market Customs (Tariff)

WASHINGTON — The United States and China intensified their trade dispute on Monday, as Beijing said it would increase tariffs on nearly $60 billion worth of American goods and the Trump administration detailed plans to tax nearly every sneaker, computer, dress and handbag that China imports to the United States.

The escalation thrust the world’s two largest economies back into confrontation. While Mr. Trump said on Monday that he would meet with China’s president, Xi Jinping, next month in Japan, the stakes are only increasing as the president continues to taunt and threaten China, causing it to retaliate on American businesses.

Financial markets fell on Monday after China detailed plans to increase tariffs, with the S&P 500 index down more than 2.4 percent for the day and more than 4 percent this month. Shares of companies particularly dependent on trade with China, including Apple and Boeing, fared poorly, and yields on three-month Treasury securities exceeded those on 10-year bonds, a sign that investors may be souring on the outlook for short-term economic growth.

China’s Finance Ministry announced Monday that it was raising tariffs on a wide range of American goods to 20 percent or 25 percent from 10 percent. The increase will affect the roughly $60 billion in American imports already being taxed as retaliation for Mr. Trump’s previous round of tariffs, including beer, wine, swimsuits, shirts and liquefied natural gas exported to China.

The move came after Mr. Trump increased tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods to 25 percent on Friday, and threatened to move ahead with taxing the remainder of goods that the United States imports from China. The Office of the United States Trade Representative released a list on Monday of the roughly $300 billion worth of products that could face up to a 25 percent tariff and requested public comment, which will begin the formal process for enacting those duties. The list includes almost every consumer product imaginable, from coffee makers to sneakers to telescopic sights for rifles.

In remarks at the White House on Monday, Mr. Trump said he had not decided whether to proceed with those additional tariffs but gave no indication he was ready to back down from his trade fight.

“I love the position we’re in,” Mr. Trump said, adding that the United States was “taking in billions of dollars in tariffs.”

Mr. Trump, appearing to relish the renewed trade war, suggested that his approach would ultimately drain business activity from China as companies shifted production to the United States or other nations that did not face American tariffs. He played down Beijing’s retaliation, saying the American economy was in a much stronger position than China’s and could more easily withstand a trade war, despite comments from his top economic adviser on Sunday that both sides would suffer from a trade fight.

The president said he would take steps to blunt any pain for American farmers and provide financial support to those hurt by Beijing’s retaliation.

“We’re going to take the highest year, the biggest purchase that China has ever made with our farmers, which is about $15 billion, and do something reciprocal to our farmers,” the president said. “Our farmers will be very happy. Our manufacturers will be very happy and our government is very happy because we’re taking in tens of billions of dollars. I think it’s working out very well.”

Economists and industry groups were not so sanguine.

“Americans’ entire shopping cart will get more expensive,” said Hun Quach, the vice president of international trade at the Retail Industry Leaders Association, which represents Best Buy, Walmart, Target, Dollar General and other stores.

Rick Helfenbein, the president of the American Apparel & Footwear Association, called the measure a “self-inflicted wound” that he said would be “catastrophic.” While footwear and apparel were largely spared from Mr. Trump’s first two rounds of tariffs, they are on the list of items that would be taxed if the president follows through with his threat to raise taxes on an additional $300 billion worth of goods.

“By tightening the noose and pulling more consumer items into the trade war, the president has shown that he is not concerned with raising taxes on American families, or threatening millions of American jobs that are dependent on global value chains,” Mr. Helfenbein said.

Both China and the United States have left a window for negotiators to try to reach a deal before the latest round of higher tariffs goes into effect. China said it would delay the higher rates until June 1, while Mr. Trump’s new 25 percent rate affects only products sent to the United States as of May 10, leaving a two- to four-week gap from the time most goods leave China by boat to when they arrive at an American port.

But the two sides would have far to go to quickly resolve what has once again become a heated economic dispute. Progress toward a trade agreement between the United States and China nearly collapsed over the past two weeks, after American negotiators accused China of reneging on substantial portions of a potential trade agreement it had previously committed to. Significant differences remain over how tariffs should be rolled back between the countries, and whether the negotiated provisions must be enshrined in Chinese law.

Beijing’s retaliation comes as many in China feel that the United States has behaved highhandedly in threatening tariffs. While China is limited in how much it can retaliate on American goods, given that it imports far less from the United States than it sells, Beijing has other ways of retaliating.

Hu Xijin, the well-connected chief editor of Global Times, a tabloid owned by the Chinese Communist Party, tweeted on Monday evening that China might halt purchases of American agricultural and energy products and Boeing aircraft, and restrict offerings of American services in China. He also cited unidentified Chinese scholars who speculated that China might sell some of its large holdings of Treasury bonds.

“We’re obviously very worried about how China will retaliate and whether they’ll start to target U.S. companies in China,” said Rufus Yerxa, the president of the National Foreign Trade Council, which represents major exporters. “I certainly can’t strike a note of optimism.”

The question now is whether another round of tariffs cements a prolonged economic struggle between the United States and China. Since Mr. Trump was elected, the two sides have repeatedly seemed close to a deal only for it to fall apart. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross seemed to have the outlines of a deal in 2017. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin talked of a deal being at hand a year ago.

With talks at an impasse, economists are warning that consumers could soon start to feel the pain from Mr. Trump’s trade fight, particularly if the United States taxes all of China’s imports. While economists differ in their forecasts of how much tariffs on both sides will reduce economic growth, most agree that the cost of tariffs is passed on to businesses or consumers in the form of higher prices.

“If there was a policy action that the administration could unilaterally engage in that would add half a point to G.D.P. growth, that would be something that people would be quite excited about,” said Michael Strain, the director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. “This is the opposite.”

The president’s top economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, acknowledged on Sunday that both the United States and China would “suffer” as a result of the tariffs. But he insisted that America would benefit in the end if the trade war forces China to give better treatment to American businesses than it had in the past.

Eric Rosengren, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, said that the Fed would need to think about cutting rates if the economy were to slow in such a way that might push unemployment higher and make 2 percent inflation harder to reach. For now, the Fed is comfortable standing pat but that could change if the trade war begins to chip away at global growth.

“I think monetary policy is appropriate for now,” Mr. Rosengren said in an interview. “If the global economy were to slow down because of concerns about trade, that is something that we’d have to think carefully about.”

[How President Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods will hit Americans’ shopping carts.]

Because China’s imports from the United States total considerably less than $200 billion, it has not had the option of matching the United States dollar for dollar on the tariff threats. Last September, China had matched Mr. Trump’s 10 percent tariffs on $200 billion a year in goods with its own tariffs of 5 to 10 percent on $60 billion a year in American goods.

On Monday, China’s Finance Ministry raised those tariffs by introducing four new categories for the $60 billion in goods. The tariffs on those four categories are 25, 20, 10 and 5 percent.

The Finance Ministry did not specify the dollar value of goods in each of the four categories. But the largest number of tariff codes in the $60 billion was assigned to the 25 percent category, suggesting that China was raising the tariffs on many imports to that level.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

U.S., China Trade War Deepens as Beijing Retaliates With Higher Tariffs

Westlake Legal Group 13DC-TRADE-facebookJumbo-v3 U.S., China Trade War Deepens as Beijing Retaliates With Higher Tariffs United States Economy Trump, Donald J Kudlow, Lawrence A International Trade and World Market Customs (Tariff)

WASHINGTON — The United States and China escalated their trade fight on Monday as Beijing moved to raise tariffs on nearly $60 billion worth of American goods in retaliation for President Trump’s decision to punish China with higher tariffs on a slew of imports.

China’s finance ministry announced that it was raising tariffs on a wide range of American goods to 20 percent or 25 percent from 10 percent in response to Mr. Trump’s decision to raise tariffs to 25 percent on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods. China’s increase will impact the roughly $60 billion in American imports already being taxed as retaliation for Mr. Trump’s previous round of levies, including beer, wine, swimsuits, shirts and liquefied natural gas.

The S&P 500 fell more than 2 percent soon after trading began in New York, and shares of companies particularly dependent on trade with China, including Apple and Boeing, fared poorly. The benchmark index is now down more than 4 percent this month. Signs that investors are concerned about the economic impact of the escalating trade war also appeared in the corporate bond market and commodities markets.

Both sides left a window for negotiators to try to reach a deal before their economies are hit by the higher tariffs. China said it would delay the higher rates for several weeks, while Mr. Trump’s new 25 percent rate impacts only products sent to the United States as of May 10, leaving a gap between the time something leaves China and arrives by boat at American ports.

But it is unclear whether the two sides can quickly resolve what has once again become a heated economic dispute. Progress toward a trade agreement between the United States and China nearly collapsed over the past two weeks, after American negotiators accused China of reneging on substantial portions of a trade agreement it had previously committed to.

In addition to raising tariffs on Friday, Mr. Trump is now proceeding with another threat to impose a 25 percent tariff on the rest of the goods that China exports to the United States, which his advisers said Friday was roughly $300 billion of Chinese products. The Office of the United States Trade Representative is expected to begin the process necessary to tax those products on Monday when it requests public comment.

Mr. Trump has appeared to relish the new fight, tweeting over the past several days that his approach would help the United States economy and hurt China’s, despite comments from his top economic adviser on Sunday that both sides would suffer from a trade war.

“China should not retaliate-will only get worse!” Mr. Trump wrote on Monday in a series of early-morning tweets.

“I say openly to President Xi & all of my many friends in China that China will be hurt very badly if you don’t make a deal because companies will be forced to leave China for other countries. Too expensive to buy in China. You had a great deal, almost completed, & you backed out!”

While the two sides have talked of further meetings in coming months, they continue to have significant differences over how tariffs should be rolled back between the countries, and whether the negotiated provisions must be enshrined in Chinese law. Mr. Trump could meet with China’s president, Xi Jinping, when both are in Japan next month for a meeting of the Group of 20 leaders.

Mr. Trump took to Twitter to defend the tariff increase on Monday, saying “there is no reason for the U.S. Consumer to pay the Tariffs.” He argued that tariffs did not fall heavily on American consumers, who could simply buy what they need from the United States or other countries that don’t face American tariffs.

But several recent academic studies have found that the incidence of the tariffs falls heavily on American consumers, rather than Chinese businesses.

Economists differ in their forecasts of how much tariffs on both sides will reduce economic growth, but most agree that the cost of tariffs is passed on to businesses or consumers in the form of higher prices.

[How Trumps’ tariffs on Chinese goods will hit Americans’ shopping carts.]

The president’s economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, on Sunday said that both the United States and China would “suffer” as a result of the tariffs, but that America would benefit in the end if this trade war forces China to give better treatment to American businesses than it had in the past.

Because China’s entire imports from the United States are considerably less than $200 billion, it has not had the option of matching the United States dollar for dollar on the tariff threats. China had matched last September President Trump’s 10 percent tariffs on $200 billion a year in goods with its own tariffs of 5 percent to 10 percent on $60 billion a year in American goods.

On Monday, China’s ministry of finance raised those tariffs by introducing four new categories for the $60 billion in goods. The tariffs on those four categories are 25 percent, 20 percent, 10 percent and 5 percent.

The finance ministry did not specify the dollar value of goods in each of the four categories. But the largest number of tariff codes in the $60 billion was assigned to the 25 percent category, suggesting that China was raising the tariffs on many imports to that level.

Beijing’s retaliation comes at a time when many in China feel that the United States has behaved highhandedly in threatening tariffs. “Mutual trust and respect are of the essence in handling the negotiations,” said Zhu Ning, a Tsinghua University economics professor.

American companies are fearful that China might resort to other methods to retaliate, beyond tariffs. Hu Xijin, the well-connected chief editor of the Global Times, a tabloid directly owned by the Chinese Communist Party, tweeted on Monday evening that China might halt purchase of American agricultural and energy products and Boeing aircraft and restrict offerings of American services in China. He also cited unidentified Chinese scholars who had speculated that China might sell some of its large holdings of Treasuries.

The question now is whether another round of tit-for-tat tariffs cements a prolonged economic struggle between the United States and China. Since Mr. Trump was elected, the two sides have repeatedly seemed close to a deal only for it to fall apart. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross seemed to have the outlines of a deal in 2017. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin talked of a deal being at hand a year ago.

Mr. Trump himself was upbeat about the prospects for a deal last month. Chinese officials have been consistently encouraging about progress toward a deal for the past two years, even though a hardening of China’s stance last week appears to have contributed to Mr. Trump’s decision this week to raise tariffs.

Last week’s round of talks in Washington is the 11th time that senior Chinese and American officials have met to discuss trade since Mr. Trump took office.

“What should be concerning to markets is how close both sides have gotten to a deal before one side backs off,” something that has happened again and again, said Hannah Anderson, a global markets strategist in the Hong Kong office of J.P. Morgan Asset Management.

Share prices dipped in Asian and European stock markets on Monday, and the trading of futures contracts indicated that Wall Street would also be down when it opens on Monday. The renminbi, China’s currency, also fell half a percent against the dollar in trading on Monday morning. Goldman Sachs revised on Monday morning its forecast for the value of the renminbi would be only 6.95 to the dollar three months from now, instead of the 6.65 it had been expecting.

Falls in the Chinese currency make Chinese goods more competitive in foreign markets, including Europe’s as well as the United States. But a weakening renminbi also creates an incentive for Chinese companies and households to try to evade China’s controls on international money movements and shift large sums out of the country, which could undermine the stability of China’s financial system.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com