Economic Conditions and Trends

Latest story

175 Shares93 Views

Trump Has Hinted at a Xi Visit. China Is Still Wondering What He Wants.

by

Chinese experts say Beijing is open to talks but is being stonewalled by the State Department and other official channels.President Trump fueled new speculation this week about a meeting with China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, when he told reporters that Washington needed to be cleaned up to prepare for a summit between the two leaders in the “not too distant future.”Mr. Trump provided no details, and China has said nothing publicly about any such meeting. The stakes of a visit would be high: President Trump has imposed 20 percent tariffs on China’s shipments to the United States, and may order another round next month. China wants to try to head off further escalations in the trade war that would set back its efforts to revive the country’s beleaguered economy, experts say.But before any summit can take place, China still needs answers to two pressing questions: What does Mr. Trump want? Who can Beijing talk to in Washington who Mr. Trump might listen to?To try to answer these questions, China sent scholars to the United States to take part in unofficial diplomatic talks last month with Trump administration officials and American foreign policy experts. China has grown concerned that the officials Beijing have been dealing with at the State Department and the National Security Council, who are outside Mr. Trump’s inner circle, are not conveying their messages to him, some of the scholars said.“We talk through the diplomatic channel. That’s the normal channel. But can that reach President Trump? Do those people we talked to really know what President Trump is thinking?” said Da Wei, the director of the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University in Beijing, who was among the scholars.China has also been publicly signaling its interest in talks. The Chinese commerce minister said earlier this month that he wrote a letter to the U.S. commerce secretary and U.S. trade representative inviting them to meet. And Chinese officials describing Beijing’s efforts to curtail the production of fentanyl last week urged the United States to return to dialogue.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 163 Shares152 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Latest Tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China Could Be His Biggest Gamble

    by

    President Trump has offered a mix of reasons for upending global trade relations, baffling and angering America’s biggest trading partners.President Trump made one of the biggest gambles of his presidency Tuesday by initiating sweeping tariffs with no clear rationale on imports from Canada, Mexico and China, triggering a trade war that risks undermining the United States economy.His actions have upended diplomatic relations with America’s largest trading partners, sent markets tumbling, and provoked retaliation on U.S. products — leaving businesses, investors and economists puzzled as to why Mr. Trump would create such upheaval without extended negotiations or clear reasoning.Mr. Trump has offered up a variety of explanations for the tariffs, saying they are punishment for other countries’ failure to stop drugs and migrants from flowing into the United States, a way to force manufacturing back to America and retribution for countries that take advantage of the United States. On Tuesday, he cited Canada’s hostility toward American banks as another reason.Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said it was difficult to understand Mr. Trump’s rationale for the tariffs but posited that his intent was to cripple Canada. “What he wants is to see a total collapse of the Canadian economy, because that’ll make it easier to annex us,” Mr. Trudeau said during a news conference on Tuesday. “That’s never going to happen. We will never be the 51st state.”Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, said Tuesday afternoon that the president might reach some sort of accommodation with Canada and Mexico and announce it on Wednesday. “I think he’s going to figure out, you do more, and I’ll meet you in the middle some way,” Mr. Lutnick said.Canada announced a series of retaliatory tariffs on $20.5 billion worth of American imports, and Mr. Trudeau said that other “non-tariff” measures were forthcoming.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    What Germany’s Election Result Means for Its Economy

    by

    The next German government faces calls to loosen borrowing rules, slash energy costs and spur innovation. It won’t be easy.Friedrich Merz and his center-right Christian Democrats emerged victorious in Germany’s election on Sunday, but the celebrations may be short. The next government, almost certainly led by Mr. Merz as chancellor, faces a stagnant economy, President Trump’s threat to put tariffs on the country’s crucial export industries and a fourth year of war in Ukraine.What’s more, the ability to address these issues is hamstrung by strict limits on government debt and deficits, making it difficult to finance higher military spending, update crumbling infrastructure and carry out other initiatives that economists say are crucial to spur growth.A dispute over this rule, known as the debt brake, brought down the government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz of the center-left Social Democrats, paving the way for Sunday’s early election. But relaxing the rule would require a two-thirds majority in Parliament to amend the Constitution, and the election outcome suggests it would be difficult to muster that much support.Already on Monday, Mr. Merz was facing calls from other politicians, economists and even the traditionally conservative central bank for the new government to find a way to adjust the spending limits to fit the country’s urgent economic demands.“In principle,” the Bundesbank wrote in a report on Monday, “it is entirely justifiable to adapt the debt brake’s borrowing limit to changing conditions when the public debt ratio is low.” German government debt is just over 60 percent of gross domestic product, far lower than in countries like Britain, France and the United States, where debt is near or above 100 percent of G.D.P.But after Sunday’s election, the two-party coalition that Mr. Merz hopes to form between his Christian Democrats, which won 208 seats, and the Social Democrats, with 120, will have to rely on other parties to achieve the two-thirds majority in Parliament necessary to change the Constitution.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tariffs Would Reverse Decades of Integration Between U.S. and Mexico

    by

    Ties between the United States and Mexico have deepened over 30 years of free trade, creating both benefits and irritants.When Dennis Nixon started working at a regional bank in Laredo, Texas, in 1975, there was just a trickle of trade across the border with Mexico. Now, nearly a billion dollars of commerce and more than 15,000 trucks roll over the line every day just a quarter mile from his office, binding the economies of the United States and Mexico together.Laredo is America’s busiest port, and a conduit for car parts, gasoline, avocados and computers. “You cannot pick it apart anymore,” Mr. Nixon said of the U.S. and Mexican economies. Thirty years of economic integration under a free trade deal has created “interdependencies and relationships that you don’t always understand and measure, until something goes wrong,” he said.Now that something is looming: 25 percent tariffs on Mexican products, which President Trump plans to impose on Saturday as he looks to pressure the Mexican government to do more to curb illegal immigration. Mr. Trump is also expected to hit Canada with 25 percent levies and impose a 10 percent tax on Chinese imports.A longtime proponent of tariffs and a critic of free trade deals, Mr. Trump seems unafraid to upend America’s closest economic relationships. He is focusing on strengthening the border against illegal immigration and the flow of fentanyl, two areas that he spoke about often during his 2024 campaign.But the president has other beefs with Mexico, including the economic competition it poses for U.S. workers. The president and his supporters believe that imports of cars and steel from Mexico are weakening U.S. manufacturers. And they say the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade deal Mr. Trump signed in 2020 to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement, needs to be updated — or perhaps, in some minds, scrapped.Many businesses say ties between the countries run deeper than most Americans realize, and policies like tariffs that seek to sever them would be painful. Of all the world’s major economic partners, the United States and Mexico are among the most integrated — linked by business, trade, tourism, familial ties, remittances and culture. It’s a closeness that at times generates discontent and efforts to distance the relationship, but also brings many benefits.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Economic Toll of Los Angeles Fires Goes Far Beyond Destroyed Homes

    by

    The ongoing disaster will affect residents’ health, local industries, public budgets and the cost of housing for years to come.After decades of mounting damage from climate-fueled natural disasters, researchers have compiled many misery-filled data sets that trace the economic fallout over weeks, months and years.The fires still burning in Los Angeles are sure to rank among America’s most expensive — but there is no perfect analogue for them, making it difficult to forecast the ultimate cost.The main reason is that wildfires have typically burned in more rural locations, consuming fewer structures and attacking smaller metropolitan areas. The Los Angeles conflagration is more akin to a storm that hits a major coastal city, like Houston or New Orleans, causing major disruption for millions of people and businesses.“It looks a lot more like the humanitarian situation from a flood or a hurricane than a wildfire that people are watching in the hills,” said Amir Jina, an assistant professor at the University of Chicago’s Harris School of Public Policy, who has studied the economic impact of climate change.On the other hand, several mitigating factors could lead to lower costs and a stronger rebound relative to other places. The cinema capital’s wealth and industrial diversity, along with other natural advantages from geography and weather, may allow Los Angeles to stave off a worst-case scenario.Estimating the likely economic losses is tricky at this stage. The weather data company AccuWeather has offered a figure of $250 billion to $275 billion, though a Goldman Sachs report said it found the estimate high. (Declining to provide a breakdown because its methodology is “proprietary,” AccuWeather said it considered many factors including long-run health impacts as well as short-term losses in the value of public companies exposed to the disaster.)We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Debate Over U.S. Sanctions on Russia For Ukraine War Intensifies

    by

    The president-elect has said he will use sanctions sparingly while vowing to end the war in Ukraine, renewing questions over their efficacy.Thousands of far-reaching sanctions have been imposed by dozens of countries on Russian banks, businesses and people since Moscow ordered tanks to roll across the border into Ukraine in the winter of 2022.Now, more than 1,000 days later, as President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to take office, questions about the sanctions’ effectiveness — and future — are expected to come under renewed scrutiny.Mr. Trump has stated, “I want to use sanctions as little as possible.” And he has made clear that there will be a shift in American policy toward Ukraine, having promised to end the war in a single day.Experts believe that sanctions and continued military aid are almost certain to be bargaining chips in any negotiations.So how valuable are the sanction chips that Mr. Trump will hold?The answer is hotly debated.Predictions in the early months of the war that economic restrictions would soon undermine President Vladimir V. Putin’s regime or reduce the ruble to “rubble” did not pan out. Mr. Putin remains entrenched in the Kremlin, and his forces are inflicting punishing damage on Ukraine and gaining on the battlefield.Yet the idea that economic sanctions could bring a quick end to the war was always more a product of hope than a realistic assessment, said Sergei Guriev, a Russian economist who fled the country in 2013 and is now the dean of the London Business School.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Chinese Companies Have Sidestepped Trump’s Tariffs. They Could Do It Again.

    by

    The companies have found plenty of new channels to the U.S. market — demonstrating the potential limits of the tariffs Donald Trump has promised to impose.After President Donald J. Trump slapped tariffs on Chinese bicycles in 2018, Arnold Kamler, then the chief executive of the bike maker Kent International, saw a curious trend play out in the bicycle industry.Chinese bicycle factories moved their final manufacturing and assembly operations out of China, setting up new facilities in Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Cambodia and India. Using parts mostly from China, those companies made bicycles that they could export directly to the United States — without paying the 25 percent tariff had the bike been shipped straight from China.“The net effect of what’s going on with these tariffs is that Chinese factories in China are setting up Chinese factories in other countries,” said Mr. Kamler, whose company imports some bicycles from China and makes others at a South Carolina factory.Pushing those factories into other countries resulted in additional costs for companies and consumers, without increasing the amount of manufacturing in the United States, Mr. Kamler said. He said he had been forced to raise his prices several times as a result of the tariffs.“There’s no real gain here,” said Mr. Kamler, whose bikes are sold at Walmart and other retailers. “It’s very inflationary.”Arnold Kamler said he had to raise prices at Kent International several times as a result of President Donald J. Trump’s 2018 tariffs.Kate Thornton for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    California Economy Feels the Pain of Hollywood Studio Troubles

    by

    The struggles have become a painful, recurring story line in Hollywood.A script supervisor visiting a food bank every other week. The cinematographer who moved to Georgia for better filming opportunities. An art department coordinator applying for administrative jobs to cover rent.The economic outlook of the Los Angeles area, with a population larger than most states, has been clouded in recent years by events that have upended the entertainment industry. Market saturation led to a shakeout among direct-to-streaming providers. Then the Covid-19 pandemic shut down production. And strikes by writers and actors last year went on for months, giving studios time to explore filming elsewhere, in regions that offer hefty tax incentives.When the strikes ended, workers in Hollywood hoped their schedules would finally fill up again. But for many people, things only got worse.In the third quarter of 2024, film production levels declined 5 percent from the same stretch in 2023, based on a report from FilmLA, the official film office of the City and County of Los Angeles.Warner Bros. Studios in Burbank, Calif. Strikes by writers and actors last year went on for months, giving studios time to explore filming elsewhere.Stella Kalinina for The New York TimesPaul Audley, the organization’s president, said in the report that even a few months ago many had thought they would see gains — hoping for a rebound from what he called “the strike effect.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    For Syria’s Economy, the Way Forward Starts With Sanctions Relief

    by

    Years of strife ruined the energy sector, battered the currency and strangled growth. The West must ease financial controls to help the economy, experts say.Although the collapse of President Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria was shockingly quick, rebuilding the devastated economy he left behind will be painfully slow.After nearly 14 years of brutal civil war and political repression, most of Syria’s oil and gas wells, roads, electricity grids, farmland and infrastructure are in ruins. Ninety percent of the population is living in poverty. The value of the Syrian pound has plummeted, and the central bank’s reserves of foreign currency — needed to buy essentials like food, fuel and spare parts — are nearly depleted.Before the war, oil accounted for two-thirds of Syria’s exports and agriculture made up roughly a quarter of economic activity. More recently, Syria’s most profitable export was captagon, an illegal, addictive amphetamine controlled by a cartel of politically connected elites.“The whole economic system in Syria is not functioning,” said Samir Aita, a Syrian economist and the president of the Circle of Arab Economists.Ahmed al-Shara, the leader of the rebel coalition that has taken power in Syria, has a daunting task ahead to unify the rebel factions, reconstitute the government, re-establish the rule of law, provide security and manage essential services like the distribution of water and other scarce resources.Even so, there is widespread agreement that the single most important step in rebuilding Syria’s economy can be taken only by the United States: Lift the punishing layers of sanctions that have effectively cut off Syria from international commerce and investment.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More