United States International Relations

More stories

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Tariff Plans Would Fuel Inflation, Janet Yellen Will Warn

    by

    The Treasury secretary plans to criticize former President Donald J. Trump’s economic proposals in a speech.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen plans to warn in a speech on Thursday that the economic policies being proposed by former President Donald J. Trump would fuel inflation and harm businesses, raising alarm about the risks of blanket tariffs.The critique, which is set to be delivered in remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations, comes less than a month before the presidential election. Mr. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have outlined starkly different views about how they see America’s role in the global economy. Although Ms. Yellen is not expected to mention Mr. Trump by name, she will argue that the broad tariffs the former president and some Republicans in Congress support would damage the U.S. economy.“Calls for walling America off with high tariffs on friends and competitors alike or by treating even our closest allies as transactional partners are deeply misguided,” Ms. Yellen plans to say in her speech, which was obtained by The New York Times. “Sweeping, untargeted tariffs would raise prices for American families and make our businesses less competitive.”Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of foreign products during his presidency, but his plans if he is re-elected would dwarf those moves. On previous occasions, Mr. Trump suggested imposing tariffs of 10 to 20 percent on most foreign items, as well as a tariff of 60 percent or more on goods from China, in addition to other levies.This week, Mr. Trump suggested he might impose across-the-board tariffs of as much as 50 percent to force foreign companies to produce in the United States to avoid the levies.“The most beautiful word in the dictionary is tariff,” Mr. Trump said, adding, “It’s my favorite word.”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

    Russian Oil Flows Through Western ‘Price Cap’ as Shadow Fleet Grows

    by

    A report shows how Russia has largely evaded sanctions aimed at limiting its revenue from oil sales.A plan hatched by wealthy Western nations to deprive Russia of oil revenue is largely faltering, a new report found, with the majority of the Kremlin’s seaborne oil exports evading restrictions that were supposed to limit the price of Russian crude.Almost two years since an oil “price cap” was enacted, nearly 70 percent of the Kremlin’s oil is being transported on “shadow tankers” that are evading the restrictions, according to an analysis published by the Kyiv School of Economics Institute, a Ukraine-based think tank.Russia’s success at circumventing the sanctions imposed by the Group of 7 nations has allowed it to continue to finance its war against Ukraine. The effectiveness of the price cap has been marred by loose enforcement of the policy. Officials in the United States and Europe have tried to balance their goals of crippling Russia’s economy while keeping oil markets well supplied to prevent price spikes.The challenges underscore the limitations that the world’s advanced economies have been facing as they attempt to intervene in global energy markets to try to hasten an end to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.The Kyiv School of Economics Institute, which has argued for tougher sanctions on Russian oil, noted in its report that Russia’s shadow fleet poses a threat to the world’s oceans because the tankers are often poorly maintained and not properly insured.“There have been several instances of shadow tankers being involved in collisions or coming close to running aground in recent months,” the report said. “Large oil spills have so far been avoided but a major disaster is waiting to happen and cleanup costs would reach billions.”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

  • 113 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    World Braces for Bigger Trade Wars if Trump Wins

    by

    Business owners and foreign governments are preparing for high tariffs and trade disruptions, depending on the outcome of the election.When you’re in the whiskey business, you’re always making predictions about the future.From the time grain grown around the Midwest enters Sonat Birnecker Hart’s distillery on the North Side of Chicago, it will be four to 10 years before the whiskey is shipped to buyers. So running her business requires careful projections about demand.Those calculations have become harder of late. With the U.S. presidential election looming, many businesses around the world are facing uncertainty about the future of American trade policy and the tariffs that products will face in global markets.For the whiskey industry, the stakes are particularly high. In March, a 50 percent tariff on American whiskey exports to Europe will snap into effect unless the European Union and the United States can come to an agreement to stop the levies.The outcome may depend on who is in office. Both former President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have embraced tariffs, but their plans differ significantly. Ms. Harris’s campaign has said she would use tariffs in a “targeted” fashion — possibly mirroring the approach of President Biden, who recently imposed tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, silicon chips and solar panels. Like Mr. Biden, she has emphasized working closely with allies.Mr. Trump, in contrast, has said his approach to trade would be even more aggressive than the trade wars of his first term, when he imposed stiff tariffs on allies and rivals to obtain concessions and try to bolster American manufacturing. He has proposed a 60 percent tariff on products from China and a tariff of more than 10 percent on other goods from around the world.A 50 percent tariff on American whiskey exports to Europe will take effect in March unless the United States and European Union reach an agreement.Taylor Glascock 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 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Trump’s Low-Tax, High-Tariff Strategy Could Clash With Economic Realities

    by

    The former president’s efforts to compel companies to remain in the United States had limited success while he was in the White House.As former President Donald J. Trump makes his closing economic argument ahead of the election, he is outlining a vision for a manufacturing renaissance that reprises a familiar pitch: Make goods in America and enjoy low taxes, or face punishing tariffs.Mr. Trump’s pitch combines the type of carrots-and-sharp-sticks approach that he called “America First” during his first term, when he imposed stiff tariffs on allies and competitors while lowering taxes on American firms.During a speech in Savannah, Ga., on Tuesday, Mr. Trump suggested he would go far beyond that initial approach and adopt what he rebranded a “new American industrialism.”The former president proposed creating “special” economic zones on federal land, areas that he said would enjoy low taxes and relaxed regulations. He called for companies that produce their products in the United States — regardless of where their headquarters are — to pay a corporate tax rate of 15 percent, down from the current rate of 21 percent. Businesses that try to route cars and other products into the United States from countries like Mexico would face tariffs as high as 200 percent.But Mr. Trump’s vision of a “manufacturing renaissance” comes when Americans are increasingly wary of foreign investment, particularly from Asia. And while he imposed steep tariffs during his presidency, his efforts to keep American companies from shifting production overseas ran into the harsh realities of lower-wage labor and technological advancements in other countries.While Mr. Trump was in office, manufacturing employment was essentially flat before the pandemic and had declined by the time he left office. In January 2021, the Alliance for American Manufacturing described his promises of an industrial resurgence as “mostly rhetoric.”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

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    How SMIC, China’s Semiconductor Champion, Landed in the Heart of a Tech War

    by

    Efforts by the Beijing-backed Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, or SMIC, to break through innovation barriers have landed it in a geopolitical tech battle.In a sprawling factory in eastern Shanghai, where marshy plains have long since been converted into industrial parks, China’s most advanced chipmaker has been hard at work testing the limits of U.S. authority.Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, or SMIC, is manufacturing chips with features less than one-15,000th of the thickness of a sheet of paper. The chips pack together enough computing power to create advancements like artificial intelligence and 5G networks.It’s a feat that has been achieved by just a few companies globally — and one that has landed SMIC in the middle of a crucial geopolitical rivalry. U.S. officials say such advanced chip technology is central not just to commercial businesses but also to military superiority. They have been fighting to keep it out of Chinese hands, by barring China from buying both the world’s most cutting-edge chips and the machinery to make them.Whether China can advance and outrace the United States technologically now hinges on SMIC, a partly state-backed company that is the sole maker of advanced chips in the country and has become its de facto national semiconductor champion. SMIC pumps out millions of chips a month for other companies that design them, such as Huawei, the Chinese technology firm under U.S. sanctions, as well as American firms like Qualcomm.So far, SMIC hasn’t been able to produce chips as advanced as those of rivals such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company in Taiwan, or others in South Korea and the United States. But it is racing forward with a new A.I. chip for Huawei called the Ascend 910C, which is expected to be released this year.Huawei’s chip is not as fast or sophisticated as the coveted processors from Nvidia, the U.S. chip giant, which the White House has banned for sale in China. SMIC can also most likely make only a small fraction of what Chinese firms want to buy, experts said.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 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Gaza Debate Reopens Divisions Between Left-Wing Workers and Union Leaders

    by

    Last week’s Democratic National Convention surfaced differences over the war in Gaza that could widen fissures between labor activists and union officials.When members of the Chicago Teachers Union showed up to march at the Democratic National Convention last week, many expressed two distinct frustrations.The first was over the war in Gaza, which they blamed for chewing up billions of dollars in aid to Israel that they said could be better spent on students, in addition to a staggering loss of life. The second was disappointment with their parent union, the American Federation of Teachers, which they felt should go further in pressuring the Biden administration to rein in Israel’s military campaign.“I was disappointed in the resolution on Israel and Palestine because it didn’t call for an end to armed shipments,” said Kirstin Roberts, a preschool teacher who attended the protest, alluding to a statement that the parent union endorsed at its convention in July.Since last fall, many rank-and-file union members have been outspoken in their criticism of Israel’s response to the Oct. 7 attacks, in which Hamas-led militants killed more than 1,000 people and took about 250 hostages. The leaders of many national unions have appeared more cautious, at times emphasizing the precipitating role of Hamas.“We were very careful about what a moral stance was and also what the implications of every word we wrote was,” the president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, said of the resolution her union recently adopted.In some ways, this divide reflects tensions over Israel and Gaza that exist within many institutions — like academia, the media and government.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

  • 63 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Harris and Trump Embrace Tariffs

    by

    Both Democrats and Republicans are expressing support for tariffs to protect American industry, reversing decades of trade thinking in Washington.When Donald J. Trump ran for president in 2016, there was not much love for tariffs in Washington. Many Republicans and Democrats believed that putting levies on imports created economic inefficiencies and that freer trade was the best recipe for growth.That view has largely fallen out of fashion in 2024. While Mr. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, differ greatly in their campaign proposals, both of their parties are increasingly embracing tariffs as an essential tool in protecting American manufacturers from Chinese and other global competitors.It has been a sharp reversal from previous decades, when most politicians fought to lower tariffs rather than raise them. But the loss of American manufacturing jobs as a result of globalization and China’s focus on churning out cheap exports have created a bipartisan backlash against more open trade. Given that Mr. Trump’s 2016 win capitalized on such sentiments, Democrats have been striving to avoid losing voters opposed to free trade.“On economic policy and trade issues, you have both major parties moving in the same direction,” said Nick Iacovella, a senior vice president at the Coalition for a Prosperous America, which advocates tariffs and domestic investments in industry.Mr. Iacovella said that Mr. Trump would most likely go further on tariffs than Ms. Harris would, but that no matter who won the election “it’s still going to be a tariffs administration, and an industrial policy one.”Ms. Harris has sought to differentiate herself from Mr. Trump’s trade proposals, which include tariffs of 10 percent to 20 percent on most imports, as well as levies of more than 60 percent on China. Many economists say that level of tariffs would drive up prices for consumers, since companies would be likely to pass on higher import costs.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

  • 113 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Tightens Technology Controls to Target Russian War Machine

    by

    The Biden administration announced new penalties on shell companies and suppliers that were feeding Russia’s war against Ukraine.The Biden administration said on Friday that it would add more than 100 companies and organizations in Russia, China and several other countries to a restricted trade list and take other measures, as it widens its net to try to capture more advanced technology that is flowing to the Russian military.The new rules aim to disrupt the procurement networks that are funneling semiconductors and other technology to Russian forces, who then use them to wage war against Ukraine. They will give the U.S. government expanded authority to prevent products made with U.S. technology from being shipped to Russia, even if those products are manufactured in countries outside of the United States.The penalties also included the addition of 123 entities in Russia, Crimea, China, Turkey, Iran and Cyprus to a so-called entity list. Suppliers are barred from sending companies on the entity list certain products without first obtaining a government license.The government also added certain addresses in Hong Kong and Turkey to the list that were known to set up shell companies, meaning any further shell companies registered to those addresses would face trade restrictions.The entity list additions include several uncovered in a recent investigation by The New York Times, including an office at 135 Bonham Strand in Hong Kong’s financial district that specialized in setting up shell companies. The office was the place of registration for at least four companies that funneled millions of restricted chips and sensors to military technology companies in Russia, the investigation found.The additions bring the number of organizations that the Biden administration has added to the entity list in relation to Russia’s war in Ukraine to more than 1,000.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