• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • No New Trade Battle, Just Old Ones

    The front page of the business section of the New York Times today notes recent Chinese state intervention in trade.  The Times is right to make this observation, if sixor eight… months late. But recent Chinese moves are neither new nor particularly important.

    The intervention in trade is long-standing; recent steps are minor extensions of previous policy. The announcement that government departments must buy local goods and services whenever available is just a restatement, the third or fourth one, of existing practices. Unfortunately, it also follows on our own “Buy America” provisions — making official protest awkward (to say the least).

    This round of tax rebates for Chinese exports was initiated last August and, as a policy tool, date back to the 1990’s crisis. Controls on raw materials exports are also long-term. It’s only now that the U.S. and E.U. have decided to complain. The most important Chinese intervention into trade continues to be a financial system that offers essentially free loans to state firms, exporters and those that compete with imports. It’s done by blocking bank competition and preventing domestic capital from leaving the country.

    To the degree possible, American negotiators should focus on this. China’s latest small steps backward do have some significance. They certainly are hypocritical in light of Chinese Minister of Commerce Chen Deming’s claim to support free trade. They might signal China’s economy is under greater strain than Beijing is willing to acknowledge. Finally, they may also be bargaining chips.

    The first meeting of the newly-christened Strategic and Economic Dialog is coming in late July. China now conveniently has some ugly new regulations it can reverse, to loud applause, while not changing its true, interventionist trade stance at all.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to No New Trade Battle, Just Old Ones

    1. Marshall Hill MI. says:

      Lets drop NAFTA ASAP!

    2. Lynn B. DeSpain says:

      There either is Free trade or there is not! There cannot be both. Prior to our own Revolution against England, they required that we only traded with them and pay tax on the goods they traded. They in turn could trade with whomever they wished. Ultimately we said no in our Declaration of Independence, and our Bill or Rights, where we stated that England and indeed no Government had the right to restrict our free trade, including our own Federal Government!

      Hozro

    3. Spiritof76 says:

      Stop calling the kettle black. America is not a capitalistic country anymore. It rivals China in restrictions. By the way, we need the Chinese so that we can print bonds in trillions.

    4. Ben C, Ann Arbor, MI says:

      Ever since the Chinese put plastic in my pets food I AVOID any Chinese product regardless of use if at all possible. I look at the label or place of manufacture and make my decisions accordingly. I am sure I am not alone.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×