From 145% to 55% – Deal or DECEPTION?

President Trump’s renewed tariff battle with China shows signs of easing after intense negotiations, but major economic divisions remain unresolved between the world’s largest economies.

At a Glance

  • Trump initiated a new tariff war against China in early 2025, with tariffs eventually reaching as high as 145%
  • Following Geneva negotiations in May, the US reduced tariffs to 30% while China dropped to 10%
  • After London talks in June, Trump adjusted US tariffs to 55%, with agreements on rare earth minerals and student visas
  • Tensions persist over non-tariff barriers including export controls and technology restrictions
  • Complete economic decoupling between the US and China remains unlikely despite ongoing disputes

The New Trade War Timeline

President Trump wasted no time reigniting trade tensions with China after returning to office in 2025. According to timeline reports, the administration quickly imposed initial 10% tariffs on Chinese imports, prompting immediate retaliation from Beijing. What began as modest economic pressure rapidly escalated into a full-scale trade confrontation, with American tariffs eventually soaring to 145% and Chinese counter-tariffs reaching 125%. The dispute expanded beyond simple import duties to include technology export controls, visa restrictions, and accusations related to China’s trade practices.

By May 2025, economic pressures on both nations brought negotiators to Geneva, resulting in the first significant de-escalation. The United States agreed to reduce its tariffs to 30%, while China made a more substantial concession by dropping its retaliatory tariffs to just 10%. This asymmetric reduction reflected the Trump administration’s continued leverage and determination to address what it views as decades of unfair Chinese trade practices that have harmed American workers and industries.

Strategic Negotiations in London

Following a June 5th phone call between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, senior officials from both nations convened in London to establish a framework for resolving the deepening economic rift. These high-level talks addressed not only tariff levels but also critical supply chain concerns, particularly regarding rare earth minerals that are essential for advanced technology manufacturing. The negotiations also touched on educational exchanges, with discussions about Chinese student access to American universities.

The outcomes of the London talks revealed President Trump’s continued tough stance. While China maintained its 10% tariff level, the U.S. position settled at 55%—significantly higher than the post-Geneva level of 30%, but well below the peak 145% rates imposed earlier in the year. This recalibration suggests a strategic approach that maintains pressure on Beijing while providing room for continued negotiations on deeper economic issues.

Beyond Tariffs: The Broader Economic Contest

The current dispute represents more than a disagreement over trade balances. Since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, trade between the nations has grown exponentially, benefiting American consumers with lower prices but contributing to manufacturing job losses in key regions. The Trump administration has consistently highlighted concerns beyond simple trade deficits, including intellectual property theft, government subsidies to Chinese companies, currency manipulation, and human rights issues.

American policy now appears focused on containing China’s technological advancement through targeted export controls and domestic investment in strategic industries. These measures reflect growing bipartisan consensus that China represents not just an economic competitor but a strategic rival. Despite these tensions, experts note that complete economic decoupling remains highly unlikely given the deep integration of supply chains and mutual economic dependencies that have developed over decades.

Looking Forward

The current stabilization in US-China trade relations appears tenuous at best. While tariff rates have moderated from their peaks, they remain substantially higher than pre-conflict levels. The agreements on rare earth minerals supply and educational exchanges represent important but limited progress on specific issues rather than a comprehensive resolution. Deeper concerns about China’s industrial policies, market access for American companies, and technology competition remain largely unaddressed.

Questions also persist about the World Trade Organization’s capacity to effectively address American concerns regarding China’s trade practices. The Trump administration has demonstrated a preference for bilateral negotiations backed by tariff leverage rather than multilateral solutions through established international institutions. As talks continue, American businesses and consumers will need to adapt to this new normal of managed economic tension between the world’s largest economies.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR