The Trump administration plans to propose slapping a 25-percent tariff on $200 billion of imported Chinese goods after initially setting them at 10 percent, in a bid to pressure Beijing into making trade concessions, a source familiar with the plan said on Tuesday.
President Donald Trump’s administration said on July 10 it would seek to impose the 10-percent tariffs on thousands of Chinese imports.
They include food products, chemicals, steel and aluminum and consumer goods ranging from dog food, furniture and carpets to car tires, bicycles, baseball gloves and beauty products.
While the tariffs would not be imposed until after a period of public comment, raising the proposed level to 25 percent could escalate the trade dispute between the world’s two biggest economies.
The source said the Trump administration could announce the tougher proposal as early as Wednesday. The plan to more than double the tariff rate was first reported by Bloomberg News.
There was no immediate reaction from the Chinese government. In July it accused the United States of bullying and warned it would hit back.
Investors fear an escalating trade war between Washington and Beijing could hit global growth, and prominent U.S. business groups have condemned Trump’s aggressive tariffs.
A spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office declined to comment on the proposed tariff rate increase or on whether changing them would alter the deadlines laid out for comment period before implementation.
In early July, the U.S. government imposed 25-percent tariffs on an initial $34 billion of Chinese imports. Beijing retaliated with matching tariffs on the same amount of U.S. exports to China.
Washington is preparing to also impose tariffs on an extra $16 billion of goods in coming weeks, and Trump has warned he may ultimately put them on over half a billion dollars of goods – roughly the total amount of U.S. imports from China last year.
The $200 billion list of goods targeted for tariffs — which also include Chinese tilapia fish, printed circuit boards and lighting products — would have a bigger impact on consumers than previous rounds of tariffs.
Erin Ennis, senior vice president of the U.S. China Business Council, said a 10 percent tariff on these products is already problematic, but more than doubling that to 25 percent would be much worse.
“Given the scope of the products covered, about half of all imports from China are facing tariffs, including consumer goods,” Ennis said. “The cost increases will be passed on to customers, so it will affect most Americans pocketbooks.”
Trump had said he would implement the $200 billion round as punishment for China’s retaliation against the initial tariffs aimed at forcing change in China’s joint venture, technology transfer and other trade-related policies.
He also has threatened a further round of tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods. The combined total of over $500 billion of goods would cover virtually all Chinese imports into the United States.
The U.S. Trade Representative’s office initially had set a deadline for final public comments on the 10 percent proposed tariffs to be filed by Aug. 30, with public hearings scheduled for Aug. 20-23.
It typically has taken several weeks after the close of public comments for the tariffs to be activated.
Reporting by Steve Holland and David Lawder Writing by Mohammad Zargham; Editing by Sandra Maler & Simon Cameron-Moore
Ex-Watergate prosecutor: Trump’s complaints about impeachment are ‘constitutionally unsound’
On Monday's edition of CNN's "OutFront," former Watergate assistant counsel Philip Allen Lacovara told anchor Erin Burnett that President Donald Trump has no leg to stand on when he complains about the impeachment process.
"Look, it's the House. It's more of a grand jury investigation is how it's been described, right?" said Burnett. "This isn't about, you get to have a lawyer and counsel present and all of those things. But this is how they're going to play the game. They're going to say it's unconstitutional, a miscarriage of justice. Is there any truth to it?"
"No, there is no truth to it. It's a constitutionally unsound argument," said Lacovara. "One of the things I learned in law school is if you don't have the facts on your side, argue the law. If you don't have the law, argue the facts. If you don't have the facts or the law, you appeal to fairness or equity or something. That's basically where they are. They are complaining about process even though it's clear the House does not have any constitutional obligation to use any particular process."
Ex-Pompeo adviser agrees to testify to impeachment investigators after resigning: report
On Monday, Politico's Andrew Desiderio reported that Michael McKinley, a former ambassador to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, has agreed to testify behind closed doors to House Democrats leading the impeachment investigation against President Donald Trump:
NEWS: Former Pompeo adviser Michael McKinley, who resigned last week, will testify in closed session on Wednesday before House impeachment investigators, according to an official working on the inquiry.
— Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) October 14, 2019
Here’s why Rudy Giuliani can not legitimately claim to be Donald Trump’s lawyer
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani bills himself as President Donald Trump's attorney. But one former prosecutor explained why that is not an accurate description during a Monday appearance on MSNBC.
"Meet the Press Daily" anchor Katy Tur interviewed former Southern District of New York Assistant U.S. Attorney Mimi Rocah, who is a distinguished fellow in criminal justice at Pace Law School.
"So this news that the SDNY is looking into what Rudy Giuliani was doing overseas in Ukraine, explain what they’re doing. Also, very weird since Giuliani used to run the office," Tur noted.