"The Biden campaign is attacking President Trump's effective tariffs on China -- while the Biden White House is planning to implement similar tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum. Biden's team is either run by hypocrites or people who don't know what they're doing. Either way, the American people deserve a leader who has a strong economic agenda and delivers on it, and that leader is President Trump."

— Karoline Leavitt, Trump Campaign Press Secretary

 

In The Early 2000s, Biden Supported WTO Membership For China

 

In February 2000, Biden Supported WTO Membership For China. MR. SHULTZ: “So I would be in favor of Chinese entry into the WTO, for these kinds of reasons.” SEN. BIDEN: “By the way, I happen to agree with you. I just -- I would suggest -- and I’m not sure where it takes me on IMF, but I would suggest that if you’ve walked through the streets of Moscow or Leningrad in the last five years, they are radically different. As bad as things are in Russia, they’re a hell of lot better off, in relative terms, than they were, you know, 10 years ago, 15 years ago.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 2/29/00)

 

In February 2000, Biden Supported Increased Diplomacy Efforts To Ensure WTO Membership For China. BIDEN: “It’s why I’ve also supported WTO membership for China and the normal trade status it requires. And it’s why I’ve urged the secretary to engage in the highest level of personal diplomacy in efforts to try to strengthen those ties.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 2/29/00)

 

• Biden Said, “By Integrating China Into The International Community Through Engagement, We Minimize The Possibility Of China Becoming An Enemy.” BIDEN: “By integrating China into the international community through engagement, we minimize the possibility of China becoming an enemy.”   (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 2/29/00)

 

In July 2000, Biden Said WTO Membership For China “Would Appear To Have Little To Do With Our National Security.” BIDEN: “So, on balance, the nuts and bolts of getting China into the World Trade Organization and opening their markets would appear to have little to do with our national security.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 7/18/00)

 

• In July 2000, Biden Said Granting China PNTR And WTO Membership Would “Enhance” U.S. National Security. BIDEN: “The question is whether denying permanent trade relations, thereby denying the United States the commercial benefits to China’s accession to the World Trade Organization, will enhance or decrease our national security. I’m of the view, at least going into this hearing, that it will enhance it, not diminish it.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 7/18/00)

 

In July 2000, Biden Said Supporting WTO Membership For China Was “The Best Way To Get China To Clean Up Its Act.” BIDEN: “And so, getting China in the World Trade Organization, a rule- based organization, is going to subject them to multinational pressures on trade, and over time they either become -- become a member of the group of nations that are considered to be -- have a basic system in place, or they won’t. China will come slowly, and China will always be governed, as I said, by self-interest, but we want China to recognize the ways in which it benefits by coming in contact with those international norms. Over time, it seems to me that’s the best way to get China to clean up its act.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 7/18/00)

 

In July 2000, Biden Said WTO Membership For China “May Have An Impact Upon Chinese Behavior In The Next Two Decades.” BIDEN: “The third point I would make is that I do believe -- and this is the place together where the chairman and I disagree in degree -- I do believe becoming a member of an international organization that has basic rules of the road and behavior moderates and/or ameliorates the conduct of the country joining or else they don’t join. I mean, they join and they essentially are expelled or become persona non grata. So I do think being a part of WTO has an impact upon -- may have an impact upon Chinese behavior in the next two decades.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 7/18/00)

 

In June 2001, Biden Cited China’s Desire To Join The WTO As Evidence China Was Not A Communist Government. BIDEN: “If I could just make one other comment. Senator Helms mentioned, sort of, the notion about the government of China is a communist government, and I think that the senator from North Carolina ought to be almost clapping loudly, publicly, because in point of fact, I don’t think it is a communist government anymore. It’s a market oriented authoritarian government. It’s a dictatorship, yes. But it is no longer, as are most of the countries in the region, in fact, practicing communism. Communism has effectively been proven to be the failure we always said it was, and so they’re rapidly selling off state companies and transitioning into the market economy, witness the trade agreement we just signed. And their hopes to accede to the WTO. It would be impossible for a true communist country to be a member of the WTO. So I think we ought to be clapping loudly at what we have seen transitionally in the globe these last years, and continue to press, as you do Senator so eloquently and forcefully, the issue of human rights and the issue of freedom and democracy, which is hopefully, the next steps.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 6/27/01)

 

In August 2001, Biden Said The U.S. Should Support WTO Membership For China Because “China Is Not Our Enemy.” “The senators warned that missile sales might force U.S. lawmakers to reconsider other agreements, such as the American endorsement of Beijing’s membership in the World Trade Organization. The WTO sets the rules for international trade. Biden, nevertheless, expressed confidence that the two sides would resolve their differences as they expand economic and trade links. ‘China is not our enemy,’ he said. ‘There’s nothing inevitable about China and the United States not being as cooperative as other nations.’” (The Associated Press, 8/8/01)

 

• Biden Said “There’s Nothing Inevitable About China And The United States Not Being As Cooperative As Other Nations.” “There’s nothing inevitable about China and the United States not being as cooperative as other nations.”  (The Associated Press, 8/8/01)

 

As Vice President, Biden Would Not Claim China Was Manipulating Its Currency, Which Would Have Been A WTO Violation

 

In January 2009, Biden Said “There’s Been No Judgment Based In The Administration That There Has Been A Manipulation” By China. BIDEN: “The policy of this administration is going to be to say to China, which occasionally the last administration was reluctant to do, you’re a major player on the world scene economically and you’ve got to play by the rules that everybody else plays by, not more stringent. We’re not going to impose on you or attempt to impose on you restraints that benefit our economy inconsistent with trade, international trade agreements that exist. The term of ours that got everybody upset was ‘manipulation.’ There’s been no judgment based in the administration that there has been a manipulation because as you know that word triggers within trade agreements certain responses. But it is clear -- it is clear -- that there has been a policy on the part of the Chinese government that I would argue is inconsistent with their long-term economic well being of having a total export economy here and doing things that guarantee that, that promote that. Understand their problem. They’ve got to create 20 million new jobs a year to keep from falling behind, but it’s not sound world economic policy. And so we’re going to be, in that sense, blunter with the Chinese about you’re in the deal, you play by the rules.” HARWOOD: “What about consequences of the kind the past administration didn’t support that your old colleagues Lindsey Graham and Chuck Schumer have talked about?” BIDEN: “Well, that requires a determination that there is, quote, ‘manipulation.’ We’ve not gotten there yet.” (CNBC’s “CNBC Reports,” 1/29/09)

 

An Accusation Of Currency Manipulation Would Lead To A WTO Complaint Against China. “If the U.S. accused China of ‘manipulating’ its currency, a term the Bush administration avoided using, it could lead to a World Trade Organization complaint against the country. Biden sought to make clear the U.S. is not officially making that claim ‘As far as the determination of ‘manipulation,’ he said, ‘we’ve not gotten there yet.’” (Politico, 1/29/09)

 

The Bush Administration Avoided Describing China’s Practices As Currency Manipulation. “If the U.S. accused China of ‘manipulating’ its currency, a term the Bush administration avoided using, it could lead to a World Trade Organization complaint against the country. Biden sought to make clear the U.S. is not officially making that claim ‘As far as the determination of “manipulation,’’’ he said, ‘we’ve not gotten there yet.’” (Politico, 1/29/09)

 

• In November 2007, Biden Criticized The Bush Administration For Not Enforcing WTO Provisions With China. SEN. BIDEN: “Wolf -- 30 seconds, Wolf. Thirty seconds.” MR. BLITZER: “All right -- 30 seconds. I’ve got to let Senator Biden –” SEN. BIDEN: “Look, it’s not the agreement; it’s the man. Under the WTO, we can shut this down. What are they all talking about here? It’s about a president who won’t enforce the law. (Applause.) When they contaminated chicken, what happened? They cut off all chickens going in from Delaware -- a $3 billion industry -- into China. They cut it off. We have power under the -- this agreement. I don’t know what anybody’s talking about here. Enforce the agreement.” MR. BLITZER: “Thank you.” SEN. BIDEN: “Shut it down.” (Joe Biden, CNN Democrat Presidential Debate, Las Vegas, NV, 11/15/07) Min: 58:57 – 59:28

 

The Obama Administration’s Trade Representative Expressed Doubts On China’s Adherence To WTO Obligations And Principles

 

In 2009, The Obama Administration’s Trade Representative Reported That “Significant Questions Have Arisen Regarding China’s Adherence To Ongoing WTO Obligations, Including Core WTO Principles.” “Nevertheless, as this year’s report again confirms, in some areas it appears that China has yet to fully implement important commitments, and in other areas, significant questions have arisen regarding China’s adherence to ongoing WTO obligations, including core WTO principles.” (“2009 Report To Congress On China’s WTO Compliance,” The United States Trade Representative, 12/2009, p. 4)

 

Obama’s USTR In 2010: Major Issues With China’s Trade Practices Include “Serious Problems With Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement … As Well As Continued Market Access Barriers And Discrimination Against Foreign Enterprises In Many Sectors Of China’s Economy.” “Major issues included China’s indigenous innovation policies, serious problems with intellectual property rights enforcement, and China’s slow movement toward accession to the WTO Government Procurement Agreement, as well as continued market access barriers and discrimination against foreign enterprises in many sectors of China’s economy.” (“2010 Report To Congress On China’s WTO Compliance,” The United States Trade Representative, 12/2010, p. 2) 

 

Obama’s USTR In 2011: China’s Interventionist Policies “Coupled With The Large Role Of State Owned Enterprises In China’s Economy,” Continue To “Generate Concerns Among U.S. Stakeholders About The Direction Of China’s Reform.” “In 2011, the prevalence of interventionist policies and practices, coupled with the large role of state owned enterprises in China’s economy, continued to generate significant concerns among U.S. stakeholders.” (“2011 Report To Congress On China’s WTO Compliance,” The United States Trade Representative, 12/2011, p. 2)

 

Obama’s USTR In 2015: Significant Trade Distortions Have Been Generated By “The Chinese Government’s Interventionist Policies And Practices And The Large Role Of State-Owned Enterprises And Other National Champions In China’s Economy.” “Many of the problems that arise in the U.S.-China trade and investment relationship can be traced to the Chinese government’s interventionist policies and practices and the large role of state-owned enterprises and other national champions in China’s economy, which continue to generate significant trade distortions that inevitably give rise to trade frictions.” (“2015 Report To Congress On China’s WTO Compliance,” The United States Trade Representative, 12/2015, p. 2)

 

USTR 2016: Significant Trade Distortions Which Have Led To Trade Frictions Are Being Generated By “The Chinese Government’s Interventionist Policies And Practices And The Large Role Of State-Owned Enterprises And Other National Champions In China’s Economy.” ”Many of the problems that arise in the U.S.-China trade and investment relationship can be traced to the Chinese government’s interventionist policies and practices and the large role of state-owned enterprises and other national champions in China’s economy, which continue to generate significant trade distortions that inevitably give rise to trade frictions.” (“2016 Report To Congress On China’s WTO Compliance,” The United States Trade Representative, 12/2016, p. 2)

 

Upon Leaving Office, Obama’s USTR, Michael Froman, Implied The Future Of Trade Had A Choice Between The U.S. Or China. “The Choice: The U.S. or China. If the United States steps back from engagement with the global economy, other countries will step in to take our place.” (Ambassador Michael Froman, “Trade, Growth, And Jobs: U.S. Trade Policy In The Obama Administration,” The United States Trade Representative, 1/1/17, p. 7)

 

• Froman Said The U.S. System Was An Open, Rules-Based System That The United States Helped Create. “Right now, there are competing visions for how the global economy should work. The choice is between the open, rules-based system that the United States helped create...” (Ambassador Michael Froman, “Trade, Growth, And Jobs: U.S. Trade Policy In The Obama Administration,” The United States Trade Representative, 1/1/17, p. 7)

 

• Froman Said The China Trade System Was One With “No Labor Or Environmental Protections, No Emphasis On Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement, No Disciplines On State-Owned Enterprises, No Commitment To A Free And Open Internet, And No Discipline On Currency Manipulation.” “Right now, there are competing visions for how the global economy should work. The choice is between the open, rules-based system that the United States helped create, and a more mercantilist approach – one in which there are no labor or environmental protections, no emphasis on intellectual property rights enforcement, no disciplines on state-owned enterprises, no commitment to a free and open Internet, and no disciplines on currency manipulation.” (Ambassador Michael Froman, “Trade, Growth, And Jobs: U.S. Trade Policy In The Obama Administration,” The United States Trade Representative, 1/1/17, p. 7)

 

• Froman: A Trade Partnership Led By China Would “Not Protect Labor And The Environment, Would Not Ensure Internet Freedom, Would Not Protect Patents Or Trademarks Or Copyright From Infringement, Counterfeiting, And Piracy, And Would Impose No Disciplines On State-Owned Enterprises.” ”For example, China is working to conclude the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, a 16-country accord that would not protect labor and the environment, would not ensure Internet freedom, would not protect patents or trademarks or copyright from infringement, counterfeiting, and piracy, and would impose no disciplines on state-owned enterprises.” (Ambassador Michael Froman, “Trade, Growth, And Jobs: U.S. Trade Policy In The Obama Administration,” The United States Trade Representative, 1/1/17, p. 8)

 

 

In 2000, Biden Argued PNTR Would Increase Protection Of U.S. Intellectual Property And “Enhance” National Security

 

Biden Claimed The U.S. Would Not Be Granting Any Trade Concessions By Granting China PNTR. BIDEN: “Granting permanent normal trade relations to China is all about opening their markets to U.S. goods and investment from my perspective. Trade concessions are all one way in this deal. They drop tariffs, they drop non-market barriers, they agree to increased protection of our intellectual property laws, which they are not doing now. We agree only to forego an annual vote on China’s trade status -- an annual threat to deny China normal trade relations has never offered us an effective leverage to encourage greater Chinese compliance with international norms in the areas of human rights, international security and trade. And I might add, we can pass this tomorrow. I’ve been here the exact same year the chairman came. We came together.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 7/18/00)

 

Biden Claimed Granting China PNTR Would Increase Protection Of U.S. Intellectual Property. BIDEN: “Granting permanent normal trade relations to China is all about opening their markets to U.S. goods and investment from my perspective. Trade concessions are all one way in this deal. They drop tariffs, they drop non-market barriers, they agree to increased protection of our intellectual property laws, which they are not doing now. We agree only to forego an annual vote on China’s trade status -- an annual threat to deny China normal trade relations has never offered us an effective leverage to encourage greater Chinese compliance with international norms in the areas of human rights, international security and trade. And I might add, we can pass this tomorrow. I’ve been here the exact same year the chairman came. We came together.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 7/18/00)

 

Biden Said Granting China PNTR And WTO Membership Would “Enhance” U.S. National Security. BIDEN: “The question is whether denying permanent trade relations, thereby denying the United States the commercial benefits to China’s accession to the World Trade Organization, will enhance or decrease our national security. I’m of the view, at least going into this hearing, that it will enhance it, not diminish it.” (Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, 7/18/00)

 

Biden Voted Against Delaying PNTR Until Certain Human Rights And Labor Standards Were Met, And Voted Against Encouraging Cooperation From China On Comprehensive Environmental Standards

 

On September 19, 2000, Biden Voted In Favor Of Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) With China. “Passage of the bill that would make normal trade relations with the People's Republic of China permanent. The bill contains a measure that would protect U.S. businesses and workers from Chinese import surges. The bill includes a provision that would establish a commission to monitor human rights, labor standards and religious freedom in China. The administration would have to report annually on China's compliance with trade agreements and express the sense of Congress that Taiwan should be admitted to the World Trade Organization. The measure would authorize $99 million for Radio Free Asia and the Voice of America to expand broadcasts to China and neighboring countries.” (HR 4444, Roll Call Vote #251: Passed 83-15: R 46-8; D 37-7, 9/19/00, Biden Voted Yea, CQ Summary, Accessed 4/6/20)

 

In 2000, Biden Voted Against Human Rights Standards And Enforcement Prior To The Implementation Of Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China. “Helms, R-N.C., amendment that would delay the effective date of permanent normal trade relations status to China until the president certifies that China has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; begun dismantling its system of re-education through labor; opened up Tibet and Xinjiang to regular, unhindered access by humanitarian agencies; reviewed the sentences of people incarcerated as counterrevolutionaries; agreed to establish a high-level continuing dialogue with the United States on religious freedom; agreed to permit the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and international human rights organizations unhindered access to religious leaders; responded to inquiries regarding people imprisoned, detained or under house arrest for religious reasons or for union organizing; and intends to release prisoners incarcerated because of religious reasons or for organizing trade unions.” (H.R. 4444, Roll Call Vote #239: Rejected 32-63: R 19-33; D 13-30, 9/12/00, Biden Voted Nay)

 

Biden Voted Against Labor Standards In Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China. “Wellstone, D-Minn., amendment that would delay permanent normal trade relations status for China until China has provided a detailed response to inquiries regarding the number of persons who are imprisoned, detained, or under house arrest for organizing unions, as well as made substantial progress in releasing prisoners incarcerated for organizing independent trade unions.” (H.R. 4444, Roll Call Vote #246: Rejected 22-74: R 9-44; D 13-30, 9/13/00, Biden Voted Nay)

 

On September 13, 2000, Biden Voted Against Environmental Standards In The Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) Agreement With China. “Wellstone, D-Minn., amendment that would delay permanent normal trade relations status for China until China has provided a detailed response to inquiries regarding the number of persons who are imprisoned, detained, or under house arrest for organizing unions, as well as made substantial progress in releasing prisoners incarcerated for organizing independent trade unions.” (H.R. 4444, Roll Call Vote #246: Rejected 22-74: R 9-44; D 13-30, 9/13/00, Biden Voted Nay, CQ Summary, Accessed 4/6/20)

 

On September 12, 2000, Prior To The Implementation Of PNTR With China, Biden Voted Against Human Rights Standards And Enforcement For China.  “Helms, R-N.C., amendment that would delay the effective date of permanent normal trade relations status to China until the president certifies that China has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; begun dismantling its system of re-education through labor; opened up Tibet and Xinjiang to regular, unhindered access by humanitarian agencies; reviewed the sentences of people incarcerated as counterrevolutionaries; agreed to establish a high-level continuing dialogue with the United States on religious freedom; agreed to permit the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and international human rights organizations unhindered access to religious leaders; responded to inquiries regarding people imprisoned, detained or under house arrest for religious reasons or for union organizing; and intends to release prisoners incarcerated because of religious reasons or for organizing trade unions.” (HR 4444, Roll Call Vote #239: Rejected 32-63: R 19-33; D 13-30, 9/12/00, Biden Voted Nay, CQ Summary, Accessed 4/6/20)

 

Biden Said There Is “No Reason” The U.S. Cannot Have A Positive Relationship With China. BIDEN: “I would basically say this is a--a relationship that’s in the making. We--there’s no reason why it cannot be positive. It will depend on the Chinese adherence to international norms. I’m hopeful that that will happen, but we have to wait and see.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 4/11/01)

 

Biden Voted Against Delaying The Effective Date Of PNTR With China Twice

 

On September 12, 2000, Biden Voted Against An Amendment To Delay The Effective Date Of PNTR Until China Prohibited The Import And Export Of Prison Labor Products. “Wellstone, D-Minn., amendment that would delay the effective date of permanent normal trade relations status to China until the president certifies that China is in compliance with memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and China prohibiting the import and export of prison labor products as well as the statement of cooperation signed March 14, 1994; and that China is fully cooperating with all outstanding U.S. requests for visitation and investigation of ‘reeducation through labor’ facilities.” (HR 4444, Roll Call #238: Rejected 29-68: D 16-28; R 13-40, 9/12/00, Biden Voted Nay, CQ Summary, Accessed 4/6/20)

 

On September 7, 2000, Biden Voted Against An Amendment To Delay The Effective Date Of PNTR With China Until They Made Changes Regarding Religious Freedom. “Wellstone, D-Minn., amendment that would delay the effective date of permanent normal trade relations status to China until the president certifies that China has made substantial changes with respect to religious freedom, by demonstrating that China has: agreed to establish an ongoing and high-level dialogue with the U.S. government on religious freedom; ratified the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights; agreed to permit the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and international human rights organizations unhindered access to religious leaders; responded to inquiries regarding people imprisoned, detained or under house arrest for religious reasons; and released prisoners incarcerated because of religious reasons.” (HR 4444, Roll Call Vote #234: Rejected 30-67: D 15-29; R 15-38, 9/7/00, Biden Voted Nay, CQ Summary, Accessed 4/6/20)

 

In August 2007, Biden Supported Emergency Tariffs On China

 

In August 2007, Biden Supported Emergency Tariffs On Chinese Imports To Offset Chinese Trade Practices. “Two other Democratic candidates, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, said they would tighten trade practices with China, including levying emergency tariffs on Chinese imports to help offset what they view as unfair trade practices with the United States. Biden noted the nearly $1 trillion the United States owes China. ‘We have to get off that sucking off of that breast which is China,’ he said.” (Des Moines Register, 8/16/07)

 

Biden Said “We Have To Get Off That Sucking Off Of That Breast Which Is China.” “We have to get off that sucking off of that breast which is China.” (Des Moines Register, 8/16/07)

 

In December 2007, Biden Opposed The Idea Of Applying Tariffs To China

 

In December 2007, Biden Opposed Applying Tariffs To China Claiming He Wasn’t “Willing To Go There.” MS. NORRIS: “Senator Biden, would you actually restrict trade with China? And given the WTO guidelines, could you actually do that?” SEN. BIDEN: “With the WTO g guidelines, we could stop these products coming in now. This president doesn’t act. We have much more leverage on China than they have on us. Let’s get something straight here. We’re making them into 10 feet tall. It took them 30 years to get 20 percent of their population out of poverty. They’ve got 800 million people in poverty. They’re in real distress. The idea that a country with 800 million people in poverty has greater leverage over us is preposterous. What it is: We’ve yielded to corporate America. We’ve yielded to this president’s notion of what constitutes trade, and we’ve refused to enforce the laws that exist. As president, I would end -- flat, bang, no importation of those toys. Why? Under WTO, you’re allowed to do it until you send inspectors to guarantee. Why aren’t they doing it? Corporate America doesn’t want –” MS. NORRIS: “Now, this listener called for tariffs. Are you willing to go there?” SEN. BIDEN: “I’m not. No, I’m not willing to go there. You don’t need to start a tariff war. All you have to do is enforce the law. Enforce the law.” (Joe Biden, NPR Democrat Presidential Debate, Des Moines, IA, 12/4/07) Min: 40:13 – 41:21

 

In 2012, Biden Praised Congress For Approving Punitive Tariffs Against China Saying They Took “A Clear Stand Against The Unfair Trade Practices That Have Put Countless American Jobs In Jeopardy”

 

In 2012, Biden Praised Congress For Approving Higher Tariffs On Goods From China And Others Who Subsidize Their Exports To The U.S. For Taking “A Clear Stand Against The Unfair Trade Practices That Have Put Countless American Jobs In Jeopardy.” “Congress on Tuesday overturned a court decision and reaffirmed that the government has the right to impose higher tariffs on goods from China and other state-run economies that subsidize their exports to the United States. The House voted 370-39 to pass the measure and send it to President Barack Obama for his signature. The Senate approved it Monday on a voice vote with no debate. ‘By passing this law, Congress has taken a clear stand against the unfair trade practices that have put countless American jobs in jeopardy,’ Vice President Joe Biden said in a statement.” (The Associated Press, 3/6/12)

 

By 2010, China “Displaced” The United States In Being The World’s Largest Manufacturing Nation By Targeting Competing Industries

 

By 2010, China “Displaced” The United States As The World’s Largest Manufacturing Nation. “As China continued its relentless growth path, its trade frictions with the U.S. also escalated into trading wars, especially after 2010 when China displaced U.S. as the world’s largest manufacturing nation.” (Xiao Cen, Vyacheslav Fos, and Wei Jiang, “A Race To Lead: How Chinese Government Interventions Shape The Sino-US Production Competition,” Social Science Research Network, 3/30/20, p. 2)

 

“The Surge In Import Competition From China After 2000 Is A Major Force Behind The Reduction In U.S. Manufacturing Employment.” “A large literature (summarized in Acemoglu et al. (2016)) shows that the surge in import competition from China after 2000 is a major force behind the reduction in U.S. manufacturing employment.” (Xiao Cen, Vyacheslav Fos, and Wei Jiang, “A Race To Lead: How Chinese Government Interventions Shape The Sino-US Production Competition,” Social Science Research Network, 3/30/20, p. 15)

• “Specifically, Import Competition Forces Domestic Innovators To Choose Between Either Quickening Their Pace Of Innovation Or Being Displaced By Foreign Innovators.” (Richard E. Baldwin, “On The Growth Effects Of Import Competition,” National Bureau Of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 4045, April 1992)

 

• “The Pro-Growth Effect Of Import Competition Is Shown To Be Welfare-Increasing.” (Richard E. Baldwin, “On The Growth Effects Of Import Competition,” National Bureau Of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 4045, April 1992)
•  

 

“An Initial Increase In The Number Of Firms In A Chinese Industry Leads To A Lasting Negative Effect On U.S. Establishments.” (Xiao Cen, Vyacheslav Fos, and Wei Jiang, “A Race To Lead: How Chinese Government Interventions Shape The Sino-US Production Competition,” Social Science Research Network, 3/30/20, p. 2)

 

“The Formation Of One More Firm In China Leads To 4.9 Fewer Employees To Be Hired In The Corresponding US Industry, Or 20.5% Of The Average Employment Of An Establishment In The US.” “According to Column (1), the formation of one more firm in China leads to 4.9 fewer employees to be hired in the corresponding US industry, or 20.5% of the average employment of an establishment in the US, whereas Column (3) suggests the increase in employment equivalent to creating an average establishment in the US leads to the shrinkage of 0.21 firms in the corresponding China industry.” (Xiao Cen, Vyacheslav Fos, and Wei Jiang, “A Race To Lead: How Chinese Government Interventions Shape The Sino-US Production Competition,” Social Science Research Network, 3/30/20, p. 14)

 

• “In Contrast, The Effect Of The US Establishments On The Number Of Firms In The Corresponding Chinese Industries Is Almost Never Significant.” “In contrast, the effect of the US establishments on the number of firms in the corresponding Chinese industries is almost never significant, except that there is a negative response in period t + 1 when assuming U.S. is the originator of the shock. If the shock initiates from China, then changes in the U.S. production has no negative impact on China later on.” (Xiao Cen, Vyacheslav Fos, and Wei Jiang, “A Race To Lead: How Chinese Government Interventions Shape The Sino-US Production Competition,” Social Science Research Network, 3/30/20, p. 15)

 

PNTR Eliminated The Potential For Sudden Tariff Spikes On Chinese Goods

 

A 2016 Study Found U.S. Manufacturing Employment Decreased As A Result Of Granting PNTR To China. “US manufacturing employment fluctuated around 18 million workers between 1965 and 2000 before plunging 18 percent from March 2001 to March 2007. This paper finds a link between this sharp decline and the United States granting Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) to China, which was passed by Congress in October 2000 and became effective upon China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) at the end of 2001.” (Justin R. Pierce and Peter K. Schott, “The Surprisingly Swift Decline In US Manufacturing Unemployment,” The American Economic Review, Vol. 106 No. 7, July 2016, p. 1632)

 

U.S. Imports From China Were Subject To Low Tariff Rates, Reserved For WTO Members, But Such Rates Required Annual “Uncertain And Politically Contentious” Renewals. “US imports from China had been subject to the relatively low NTR tariff rates reserved for WTO members since 1980.2 But for China, these low rates required annual renewals that were uncertain and politically contentious. Without renewal, US import tariffs on Chinese goods would have jumped to the higher non-NTR tariff rates assigned to nonmarket economies, which were originally established under the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930.” (Justin R. Pierce and Peter K. Schott, “The Surprisingly Swift Decline In US Manufacturing Unemployment,” The American Economic Review, Vol. 106 No. 7, July 2016, p. 1632-1633)

 

“PNTR Removed The Uncertainty Associated With These Annual Renewals By Permanently Setting US Duties On Chinese Imports At NTR Levels.” (Justin R. Pierce and Peter K. Schott, “The Surprisingly Swift Decline In US Manufacturing Unemployment,” The American Economic Review, Vol. 106 No. 7, July 2016, p. 1633)

---