Business & Economics
US-China Pact to Form Trade & Investment Councils and Slash Select Tariffs After Trump-Xi Summit
On 17 May 2026 Beijing revealed that Washington and Beijing had agreed, during President Trump’s state visit, to create bilateral trade and investment boards tasked with negotiating matched tariff cuts on targeted goods—directly contradicting Trump’s claim a day earlier that tariffs were never broached.
Focusing Facts
- Jamieson Greer said the new Trade Board will supervise reciprocal tariff reductions covering roughly US$30 billion in imports for each country.
- China confirmed an initial commitment to buy 200 Boeing aircraft, with the prospect—cited by Trump—of eventual orders for up to 750 jets.
- Both governments described the understandings on tariffs, agriculture and aviation as “preliminary,” with details, timelines and volumes still under negotiation.
Context
Managed-trade mechanisms have surfaced before when a rising Asian power unsettled U.S. industries—the 1985 Plaza Accord and the 1989 U.S.–Japan Structural Impediments Initiative set up similar councils aimed at smoothing frictions but ultimately shifted little of the structural trade imbalance. Establishing boards rather than relying on multilateral WTO channels signals a return to bilateral, state-steered bargaining that has waxed and waned since Nixon’s 1972 opening to China. If the bodies evolve into durable forums, they could temper the decoupling trend of the 2020-25 tariff spiral; if they stall, they may be remembered like the U.S.–Japan accords—symbolic pauses before renewed competition. Over a 100-year horizon the episode matters less for the immediate soybean or jet orders than for testing whether the two largest economies can institutionalize dispute management without a shooting war or a complete economic split.
Perspectives
Chinese state-owned media
e.g., China Daily, China Daily Asia — Portrays the summit as a constructive breakthrough that will bolster global supply chains by institutionalizing councils and slashing mutually-chosen tariffs, proving dialogue can stabilize the relationship. By stressing harmony and shared benefits while skimming over the lack of specifics, these outlets serve Beijing’s messaging goal of depicting China as a steady, responsible negotiator and downplaying any remaining friction or U.S. skepticism.
U.S. local / mainstream press
e.g., The Spokesman Review — Highlights the discrepancy between Beijing’s claim that tariffs were discussed and President Trump’s insistence they were not, framing the episode as another instance of confusion surrounding his China policy. Focusing on presidential contradiction can feed a narrative of U.S. disarray, which attracts readership but may under-report any substantive progress that does not fit the drama.
Regional Asian independent outlets
e.g., Profit by Pakistan Today, The Jakarta Post — Emphasize that any tariff, agriculture and aircraft understandings remain strictly “preliminary,” noting that key figures, volumes and timelines are still up in the air after the Trump-Xi meetings. By spotlighting the provisional nature of the deals, these papers cater to cautious business readers and regional stakeholders, but the sober tone can underplay the political symbolism both governments stress.
Like what you're reading?