I know this borders Civil Aviation and Non-Civil Aviation, but this will impact the Boeing company, so I think this is fitting.

BEIJING - China may be reducing the number of aircraft ordered at Boeing as revenge for the US government scaling up import tariffs. As a result, the Boeing share fell in value shortly after the stock market opening by almost 3 percent.

In addition to canceling orders with Boeing, it is also an option not to import agricultural products and energy from the US anymore. Hu Xijin, editor in chief of the Chinese newspaper Global Times, tweeted that on Monday. He is seen as the mouthpiece of the Communist Party.

China decided earlier today to raise import tariffs on US $ 60 billion. That was a reaction to the decision of the US government last Friday to tax $ 200 billion in Chinese goods.

The two countries seemed to be close to a trade agreement for a long time, but negotiations broke off last week. According to the Americans, China would not make enough concessions to reduce the trade deficit with the US.

If China actually decides to punish Boeing for Trump's policy, then the aircraft manufacturer has a big problem. The Asian country accounts for 15 percent of global aviation and has hundreds of orders placed with Boeing.

Source in Dutch

Hu Xijin 胡锡进 wrote:

China hasn’t released countermeasures immediately. I believe the reason is that China is drafting a plan that will have precise effects, making sure it hits the US while minimizing damage to itself.

Hu Xijin 胡锡进 wrote:

China may stop purchasing US agricultural products and energy, reduce Boeing orders and restrict US service trade with China. Many Chinese scholars are discussing the possibility of dumping US Treasuries and how to do it specifically.

This could be quite painful for Boeing, on top of the MAX-woes loosing a major costumer on political grounds which they have no control over.

Elections have consequences

Elementalism wrote:

Elections have consequences

Policies have consequences.....

Sounds like Boeing can't even rely on its main customer (the US government) to protect its best interests.

Dutchy wrote:

Elementalism wrote:

Elections have consequences

Policies have consequences.....

People who are elected set those policies.

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The Smoot-Hawley supporters strike again

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

WTO would slap them for illegal subsidies.

Dutchy wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Or how about addressing a MASSIVE trade deficit? But then, if you don't live in the US, why would you care?

Dutchy wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Yeah, that's not a good strategy in the long run.

Tariffs do have a function, sometimes it's a good economic incentive for domestic growth. But in this case it's not. It directly hurts U.S. industry and jobs.

Elementalism wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

WTO would slap them for illegal subsidies.

WTO has no jurisdiction over domestic affairs.

Dutchy wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Chinese citizens will pay too, as Airbus raises prices 300% on a monopoly.

Varsity1 wrote:

Elementalism wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

WTO would slap them for illegal subsidies.

WTO has no jurisdiction over domestic affairs.

In this situation they would be putting a tarriff on an international good\goods to subsidize a domestic corporation. A domestic corporation that sells into international markets. This would be an illegal subsidy.

Dutchy wrote:

Elementalism wrote:

Elections have consequences

Policies have consequences.....

And China stealing IP and illegally (per WTO rules) subsidizing everything in its country, dumping steel, dumping melamine laced products, etc.

Should that *not* have consequences? Everyone seems to be taking China's side. It's funny now to Europeans, but will they be laughing when an A330/A350 knock-off (C929) takes to the skies?

Dutchy wrote:

Elementalism wrote:

Elections have consequences

Policies have consequences.....

Tweets have global consequences! Who knew tweets could be so powerful?

AirFiero wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Or how about addressing a MASSIVE trade deficit? But then, if you don't live in the US, why would you care?

While the tech-transfer requirements should absolutely be attacked, tariffs to go after a trade deficit are assinine.

Dutchy wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

We are paying Boeing for designing and building new planes thru state/federal subsidies/incentives and also subsidizing exports thru EXIM.

Unless you are saying without exports each 737 MAX costs the same as Air Force One or P8, we will do just fine.

So China goes all Airbus, Airbus should be quite happy!!! Just think of all the A321 and A330's to be sold. Airbus's backlog rises and the available slots get pushed years back. Boeing is able to sell about the same number of planes, but to others.

Similarly, china doesn't buy soybeans from the US, but buys from other countries. Other buyers find good prices on US soybeans and buys them. Unless there is a surplus of a product on the market all of the product will get cleared.

The US basically is adding a sales tax to goods from China, equalizing the taxes other suppliers pay to the US and/or their home countries. Suppliers outside China have a chance to sell to the US at a price they can turn a profit on.

It's not "Trump policy", it's "US policy". Or is it "Xi Jinping threats Boeing to punish for Trump policy"?

I'm not pro-tariff necessarily, but at the same time we are going to have to take the hit sooner or later with China - might as well be now. Boeing has taken a few kicks to the nuts, and have shot themselves in the foot as well. Let's just make it a trifecta.

I say good... for this will allow free enterprise firms to have access to Boeing Aircraft sooner should China provide Boeing with white tails.

A lot of Airlines in the US and across the world are ready to upgrade their fleets.
Lord knows there are a bunch of A380s coming on the market soon needing to be replaced.

No airline wants to be the last one holding on to an orphan fleet.

ssteve wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Or how about addressing a MASSIVE trade deficit? But then, if you don't live in the US, why would you care?

While the tech-transfer requirements should absolutely be attacked, tariffs to go after a trade deficit are assinine.

Every other country in the world does tariffs. Why must the United States NOT levy tariffs, especially given such a huge trade deficit?

This is not good news folks, for Boeing or for anybody. It is going to complicate things immeasurably. Just think of the complications if this goes ahead. It is going to be much more difficult doing business for Aviation suppliers. I do hope this is sorted out before the effects start to be felt. For all involved. We take two steps forward and then one backwards and ouch! It's not going to be an easy ride.

NZ321 wrote:

This is not good news folks, for Boeing or for anybody. It is going to complicate things immeasurably. Just think of the complications if this goes ahead. It is going to be much more difficult doing business for Aviation suppliers. I do hope this is sorted out before the effects start to be felt. For all involved. We take two steps forward and then one backwards and ouch! It's not going to be an easy ride.

If you look at the history of the trade negotiations, these seemingly bad snags come and go. It is in neither countries best interests to have an unresolved trade issue. The bluster on both sides is nothing but a part of the negotiation process. Give it time.

AirFiero wrote:

ssteve wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Or how about addressing a MASSIVE trade deficit? But then, if you don't live in the US, why would you care?

While the tech-transfer requirements should absolutely be attacked, tariffs to go after a trade deficit are assinine.

Every other country in the world does tariffs. Why must the United States NOT levy tariffs, especially given such a huge trade deficit?

The trade deficit is skewed because of the role of the Dollar as fiat currency around the world. Then there is a huge amount of financial services provided by the USA that actually benefit the U.S.

Looking at the deficit only is shortsighted.

oOfredOo wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

ssteve wrote:

While the tech-transfer requirements should absolutely be attacked, tariffs to go after a trade deficit are assinine.

Every other country in the world does tariffs. Why must the United States NOT levy tariffs, especially given such a huge trade deficit?

The trade deficit is skewed because of the role of the Dollar as fiat currency around the world. Then there is a huge amount of financial services provided by the USA that actually benefit the U.S.

Looking at the deficit only is shortsighted.

If you are going to widen the scope, you also need to look at Deficits, borrowing, and so on. But a trade deficit isn't a good thing in any case.

Boeing is a US-government subsidized company, both directly and indirectly - and that's apart from it also being integral to the military industrial complex. It's galling to witness the US righteously accuse other countries of subsidizing their industries and then imposing either punitive sanctions or tariffs.

It was China that took the lead by their fleet-wide grounding of the 737-8MAX and refusal to allow overflying rights to any airline flying them. They stopped Boeing's easy way out of "pilot error" against third world or developing countries like Ethiopia (Ethiopian Airlines) and Indonesia (Lion Air). Further, Boeing it still reeling from the incremental leaks from whistleblowers and reporting in the Wall Street Journal concerning the manufacture, design and MCAS on that aircraft.

It's not realized in the West that China check-mated both Boeing and the FAA as a result of its robust stance on the 737.8MAX. Not only did they defend Ethiopia and Indonesia against Boeing, but they destroyed the credibility of the FAA that was still pretending that the aircraft was good to go - before the FAA finally caved in and grounded US planes.

China has no intention of permanent dependency on Boeing or Airbus since both companies are susceptible to political pressure (witness both companies now withdrawing their aircraft sales to Iran after briefly resuming them 2 years ago). Don't forget that China has begun to manufacture its own civil aircraft and has access to Russia's long history of aircraft design by virtue of the 2 countries being founding members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and now, even closer bi-lateral cooperation.

Boeing is in a very defensive position in the light of both the 737-8MAX and emerging revelations of the construction of the 787. If I'm not mistaken, both aircraft types are in Chinese fleets. I suspect China will put Boeing under further pressure and they are correct to do so.

I live in China. I am not Chinese.

You know there is something odd about trade figures. In theory if you summed up the trade figures for all the countries in the world it should sum to zero - but it doesn't and never has. The world has an innate trade deficit. For that I am blaming those protectionist martians!

StTim wrote:

You know there is something odd about trade figures. In theory if you summed up the trade figures for all the countries in the world it should sum to zero - but it doesn't and never has. The world has an innate trade deficit. For that I am blaming those protectionist martians!

Perhaps the printing of fiat currency and borrowing skew the world GDP?

GearShaft5 wrote:

Not only did they defend Ethiopia and Indonesia against Boeing,

They did not.

AirFiero wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Or how about addressing a MASSIVE trade deficit? But then, if you don't live in the US, why would you care?

The trade deficit was $350B in Chinas favor in 2017. Does the rest of the world think we Americans are going to allow this to continue? How do you think the Chinese are able to snap up real estate and other luxury goods in cash in other parts of the world? Did they suddenly find a rainbow with a pot of gold under it? They have become accustomed to just selling goods to us and not buying anything in return. Its called TRADE. I buy something from you, you buy something back of relatively equal value.

Dutchy wrote:

I know this borders Civil Aviation and Non-Civil Aviation, but this will impact the Boeing company, so I think this is fitting.

BEIJING - China may be reducing the number of aircraft ordered at Boeing as revenge for the US government scaling up import tariffs. As a result, the Boeing share fell in value shortly after the stock market opening by almost 3 percent.

In addition to canceling orders with Boeing, it is also an option not to import agricultural products and energy from the US anymore. Hu Xijin, editor in chief of the Chinese newspaper Global Times, tweeted that on Monday. He is seen as the mouthpiece of the Communist Party.

China decided earlier today to raise import tariffs on US $ 60 billion. That was a reaction to the decision of the US government last Friday to tax $ 200 billion in Chinese goods.

The two countries seemed to be close to a trade agreement for a long time, but negotiations broke off last week. According to the Americans, China would not make enough concessions to reduce the trade deficit with the US.

If China actually decides to punish Boeing for Trump's policy, then the aircraft manufacturer has a big problem. The Asian country accounts for 15 percent of global aviation and has hundreds of orders placed with Boeing.

Source in Dutch

Hu Xijin 胡锡进 wrote:

China hasn’t released countermeasures immediately. I believe the reason is that China is drafting a plan that will have precise effects, making sure it hits the US while minimizing damage to itself.

Hu Xijin 胡锡进 wrote:

China may stop purchasing US agricultural products and energy, reduce Boeing orders and restrict US service trade with China. Many Chinese scholars are discussing the possibility of dumping US Treasuries and how to do it specifically.

This could be quite painful for Boeing, on top of the MAX-woes loosing a major costumer on political grounds which they have no control over.

Hu Xijin is the editor of Global Times in China, the party's right wing tabloid that usually display the highest degree of nationalistic emotion, so I would not take words from him as if they represent the mind and action of the Beijing government. Just one week ago he also said that it is unlikely for Liu He to visit America but the visit occurred anyway.

B737Captain1980 wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Or how about addressing a MASSIVE trade deficit? But then, if you don't live in the US, why would you care?

The trade deficit was $350B in Chinas favor in 2017. Does the rest of the world think we Americans are going to allow this to continue? How do you think the Chinese are able to snap up real estate and other luxury goods in cash in other parts of the world? Did they suddenly find a rainbow with a pot of gold under it? They have become accustomed to just selling goods to us and not buying anything in return. Its called TRADE. I buy something from you, you buy something back of relatively equal value.

Problem is that US has very expensive labor, and until that labor is used to produce something unique (e.g. high-end jet airplanes), or takes advantage of some natural resources (soils of Mississippi valley) end product is often not competitive. Performance gains are being made - but they are being made everywhere.
Boeing, from this perspective, is in unique position as a huge company which can sell high-tech product all over the world, and doing so for decades - and hopefully for decades to come. Even prior tech leaders - e.g. Intel - seem to be loosing steam. So this is really a punch where it hurts.

B737Captain1980 wrote:

AirFiero wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

The US citizens paying Boeing for not delivering planes to China because of Trump's policies. Makes sense I guess.

Or how about addressing a MASSIVE trade deficit? But then, if you don't live in the US, why would you care?

The trade deficit was $350B in Chinas favor in 2017. Does the rest of the world think we Americans are going to allow this to continue? How do you think the Chinese are able to snap up real estate and other luxury goods in cash in other parts of the world? Did they suddenly find a rainbow with a pot of gold under it? They have become accustomed to just selling goods to us and not buying anything in return. Its called TRADE. I buy something from you, you buy something back of relatively equal value.

The world holds the USA at a double standard. They expect the US to play fair and equitable, while unilaterally accepting smaller countries acting in their self interest as normal and rational behavior.

As soon at the USA starts acting in it's best interest, its appalling, illegal and unimaginable.

China mostly exports cheap crap to the USA. That will be easily sourced from countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, India and South America in the future.

We should’ve been standing up to China 30 years ago. If it were a Democrat, nobody would have a problem with it. The trade balance has been so one sided. Coupled with their non-existant trademark laws, you have faux DC-9s flying around China.

ssteve wrote:

While the tech-transfer requirements should absolutely be attacked, tariffs to go after a trade deficit are assinine.

And the recent tariffs are specifically tied to Beijing backtracking on virtually every specific matter related to intellectual property and tech transfer in the trade negotiations with the U.S. It's not about the trade deficit.

Dutchy wrote:

This could be quite painful for Boeing, on top of the MAX-woes loosing a major costumer on political grounds which they have no control over.

Absolutely, but it's also painful for China's airlines. Airbus has a very healthy backlog (apart from the A330neo) for its products and a government policy to not purchase from Boeing means that Airbus can pretty much name its price.

GearShaft5 wrote:

Boeing is a US-government subsidized company, both directly and indirectly - and that's apart from it also being integral to the military industrial complex. It's galling to witness the US righteously accuse other countries of subsidizing their industries and then imposing either punitive sanctions or tariffs.

It was China that took the lead by their fleet-wide grounding of the 737-8MAX and refusal to allow overflying rights to any airline flying them. They stopped Boeing's easy way out of "pilot error" against third world or developing countries like Ethiopia (Ethiopian Airlines) and Indonesia (Lion Air). Further, Boeing it still reeling from the incremental leaks from whistleblowers and reporting in the Wall Street Journal concerning the manufacture, design and MCAS on that aircraft.

It's not realized in the West that China check-mated both Boeing and the FAA as a result of its robust stance on the 737.8MAX. Not only did they defend Ethiopia and Indonesia against Boeing, but they destroyed the credibility of the FAA that was still pretending that the aircraft was good to go - before the FAA finally caved in and grounded US planes.

China has no intention of permanent dependency on Boeing or Airbus since both companies are susceptible to political pressure (witness both companies now withdrawing their aircraft sales to Iran after briefly resuming them 2 years ago). Don't forget that China has begun to manufacture its own civil aircraft and has access to Russia's long history of aircraft design by virtue of the 2 countries being founding members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and now, even closer bi-lateral cooperation.

Boeing is in a very defensive position in the light of both the 737-8MAX and emerging revelations of the construction of the 787. If I'm not mistaken, both aircraft types are in Chinese fleets. I suspect China will put Boeing under further pressure and they are correct to do so.

I live in China. I am not Chinese.

I think you need to get out more. Plenty of people opined that following China's MAX grounding. The argument wasn't over what they did, but why they did it. It depends on who you want to believe - they are just very cautious, or they are just very strategic.

As someone who regularly flies to/from/in China, this is good news for me. Maybe it's the only good news about what's happening, but still a good one.

Less of those Crampliners in the skies... Now, if only we could do the same in Europe...

workhorse wrote:

As someone who regularly flies to/from/in China, this is good news for me. Maybe it's the only good news about what's happening, but still a good one.

Less of those Crampliners in the skies... Now, if only we could do the same in Europe...

How would there be less?

WorldFlier wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Elementalism wrote:

Elections have consequences

Policies have consequences.....

And China stealing IP and illegally (per WTO rules) subsidizing everything in its country, dumping steel, dumping melamine laced products, etc.

Should that *not* have consequences? Everyone seems to be taking China's side. It's funny now to Europeans, but will they be laughing when an A330/A350 knock-off (C929) takes to the skies?

Ugh, this of course has turned into a political dumpster fire fast.

However, there are real concerns about China and the IP thing. Problem is throwing blanket tariffs on everything does nothing except destabilize the global economy.

China has too much pride to just back down at the threat of tariffs. If tariffs are used here, they should be used strategically to make China look less attractive to tech companies using their REEs for manufacturing. Tax (Tariff) Chinese REEs and components using them to stabilize REE prices so that it's economical for the US and allies to mine them so the tech companies (where IP protections really matter) can relocate their manufacturing as well.

What the admin is doing is just stupid. China isn't going to back down to tantrums and threats of playing a game of chicken with the economy. You want change, you change the economics for businesses. They're the only players here who might fold.

B737Captain1980 wrote:

They have become accustomed to just selling goods to us and not buying anything in return. Its called TRADE. I buy something from you, you buy something back of relatively equal value.

There are lots of issues with "unfair trade practices" by the Chinese, having balanced trade accounts is not the issue. If the US consumer saved more instead of spending every cent they make on frequently unnecessary junk and they want it cheap too, this whole trade issue with China would be a non issue!

I mean, we know in the future the Chinese Government would force local airlines to buy Chinese made plane in upcoming decades, narrow-body or widebody.
For now, the west wouldn't get that hurt since they only have Airbus or Boeing to choose. Both are western companies.

I think it would be wise for both Airbus and Boeing to start thinking about their market shares when the chinese stop buying their products in upcoming decades.

The trade deficit was $350B in Chinas favor in 2017. Does the rest of the world think we Americans are going to allow this to continue? How do you think the Chinese are able to snap up real estate and other luxury goods in cash in other parts of the world? Did they suddenly find a rainbow with a pot of gold under it? They have become accustomed to just selling goods to us and not buying anything in return. Its called TRADE. I buy something from you, you buy something back of relatively equal value.

This is not the Middle ages, we Buy/Sell/Trade goods with $$$, not other goods. The country/corporation/Person with best product generally sells the most, but doesn't necessary buy the most.

American Real Estate companies/Hotels/Billionaires have been snapping up real estate and other luxury goods around the world since WWII. USA has a stranglehold in few key industries (Defense & Aerospace, Entertainment, Software, Social Media, Microprocessor, Jet engine, Soft Drinks etc) to an extent that rest of the world does not even have an foothold in those industries.

America has every right to Tariff any import they like. The problem is, since china's economy is so huge, it can continue building Global companies without entering the US market.(Example. Chinease Banks and Cell phone companies). Unfortunately for the US, its corporation cannot become a Global leaders any longer without entering the Chinese market.

There are plenty of Countries that are competing effectively with Chinese products by offering a superior/premium products. (Germany/Taiwan/Japan/Korea/Singapore/Isreal/Turkey/Netherlands/).
The problem with American is they want to charge a premium price for a mediocre products , and no one wants' to buy them.

This tariff fight reminds me of the Detroit3's fight against Japanese cheap cars in the 70's. They just cried and moan, but never address the main issue: crappy products.

The tariff might give America a little bit of breathing room, but if you want to sell more stuff to china, make better products.

AirbusCanada wrote:

The trade deficit was $350B in Chinas favor in 2017. Does the rest of the world think we Americans are going to allow this to continue? How do you think the Chinese are able to snap up real estate and other luxury goods in cash in other parts of the world? Did they suddenly find a rainbow with a pot of gold under it? They have become accustomed to just selling goods to us and not buying anything in return. Its called TRADE. I buy something from you, you buy something back of relatively equal value.

This is not the Middle ages, we Buy/Sell/Trade goods with $$$, not other goods. The country/corporation/Person with best product generally sells the most, but doesn't necessary buy the most.

American Real Estate companies/Hotels/Billionaires have been snapping up real estate and other luxury goods around the world since WWII. USA has a stranglehold in few key industries (Defense & Aerospace, Entertainment, Software, Social Media, Microprocessor, Jet engine, Soft Drinks etc) to an extent that rest of the world does not even have an foothold in those industries.

America has every right to Tariff any import they like. The problem is, since china's economy is so huge, it can continue building Global companies without entering the US market.(Example. Chinease Banks and Cell phone companies). Unfortunately for the US, its corporation cannot become a Global leaders any longer without entering the Chinese market.

There are plenty of Countries that are competing effectively with Chinese products by offering a superior/premium products. (Germany/Taiwan/Japan/Korea/Singapore/Isreal/Turkey/Netherlands/).
The problem with American is they want to charge a premium price for a mediocre products , and no one wants' to buy them.

This tariff fight reminds me of the Detroit3's fight against Japanese cheap cars in the 70's. They just cried and moan, but never address the main issue: crappy products.

The tariff might give America a little bit of breathing room, but if you want to sell more stuff to china, make better products.

We don't want china to buy more US products, that's a bandaid. We want china to stop dumping into global markets. We can't stop that, so we'll stop them from selling into the USA.

kelvin933 wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

It would be far cheaper for the US gov to use the proceeds of taxed Chinese goods to subsidize Boeing and other industries impacted by reduced Chinese imports.

The Smoot-Hawley supporters strike again

A myth that refuses to die is that smoot-hawley caused the Great Depression. It was caused by a world wide collapse in the money supply

Selling more stuff to China is not about building better products.

Jouhou wrote:

WorldFlier wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Policies have consequences.....

And China stealing IP and illegally (per WTO rules) subsidizing everything in its country, dumping steel, dumping melamine laced products, etc.

Should that *not* have consequences? Everyone seems to be taking China's side. It's funny now to Europeans, but will they be laughing when an A330/A350 knock-off (C929) takes to the skies?

Ugh, this of course has turned into a political dumpster fire fast.

However, there are real concerns about China and the IP thing. Problem is throwing blanket tariffs on everything does nothing except destabilize the global economy.

China has too much pride to just back down at the threat of tariffs. If tariffs are used here, they should be used strategically to make China look less attractive to tech companies using their REEs for manufacturing. Tax (Tariff) Chinese REEs and components using them to stabilize REE prices so that it's economical for the US and allies to mine them so the tech companies (where IP protections really matter) can relocate their manufacturing as well.

What the admin is doing is just stupid. China isn't going to back down to tantrums and threats of playing a game of chicken with the economy. You want change, you change the economics for businesses. They're the only players here who might fold.

The global economy was destabilized the day China entered the WTO.

If China is going to reduce US imports of food and energy, they will only be hurting themselves. Just as Chinese workers lose their jobs, they will be facing higher food and fuel prices.

China reneged on the deal at the last moment. Obviosly some think that is ok.

Trump manages to destabilize core US industries, something that neither China nor Russia (Soviet Union included) ever achieved. All Chinese airlines are controlled by the Chinese government there's even more than just economic factors that will drive them away from buying Boeing.

JayinKitsap wrote:

So China goes all Airbus, Airbus should be quite happy!!! Just think of all the A321 and A330's to be sold. Airbus's backlog rises and the available slots get pushed years back. Boeing is able to sell about the same number of planes, but to others.

Similarly, china doesn't buy soybeans from the US, but buys from other countries. Other buyers find good prices on US soybeans and buys them. Unless there is a surplus of a product on the market all of the product will get cleared.

The US basically is adding a sales tax to goods from China, equalizing the taxes other suppliers pay to the US and/or their home countries. Suppliers outside China have a chance to sell to the US at a price they can turn a profit on.

What you’re writing is what people don’t seem to get. Aircraft manufacturing is a duopoly. If airbus sells more in China, it will sell less in Brazil. If China buys fewer US soybeans and gets them from elsewhere, US soybeans will be sold elsewhere unless people start consuming less soybeans.