Goldman Sachs has a message for traders clinging to the hope that U.S. and Chinese negotiators will reach an eleventh-hour solution before the trade war escalates at midnight on Friday: Don’t bet on it.
U.S. markets gyrated on Wednesday as investors grappled with conflicting headlines on whether the trading relationship between the world’s two largest economies will truly take a turn for the worse.
It’s a “close call,’’ writes Goldman analyst Alec Phillips, a former Senate Finance Committee staffer, who judges that there’s a 60 percent chance higher tariffs rates will go into effect.
In an interview on Bloomberg TV, JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon agreed that he didn’t think the two sides would get the deal done by Friday.
Goldman doesn’t expect trade talks to devolve much further. Phillips views the likelihood that tariffs are applied to the final round of $300 billion of Chinese imports as one-in-four, and just a one-in-10 chance that auto tariffs are announced on Canada and Mexico, as this would scuttle the odds of the passage of a renegotiated trade pact among the three North American countries.
Trump announced via Twitter over the weekend that the levy on $200 billion in Chinese imports would rise to 25 percent on May 10, citing a lack of progress in negotiations between the two sides. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer echoed the president’s remarks after the close of trading on Monday.
In a new interview, Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban sharply criticized the tariffs slapped on Chinese products by President Donald Trump, proposing instead that the U.S. stop allowing Chinese companies to go public or trade on U.S. stock exchanges.
“I'd shut down all Chinese IPOs—that's the first step,” says Cuban, a billionaire entrepreneur and host of the show “Shark Tank.” “Given [Trump’s] propensity for using Twitter and throwing warning shots, I would throw out there that we might put a halt on the trading of Chinese-listed stocks in the United States.”
“A trading halt would certainly create a lot of disruption for those Chinese companies,” adds Cuban, who’s considering an independent run for president in 2020.
Why Cuban opposes Trump tariffs, explains how he would fight trade war
Cuban has also invested in hundreds of start-ups as a host of the TV show “Shark Tank,” which he joined in 2012.
Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban watches during the second half of an NBA basketball game between the Washington Wizards and the Dallas Mavericks, Wednesday, March 6, 2019, in Washington. The Wizards won 132-123. (AP Photo/Nick Wass) ‘I think tariffs are attacks on the American people’
“I’m not a fan of the tariffs,” Cuban says. “I think tariffs are attacks on the American people.”
Cuban acknowledged that his proposed ban of Chinese companies on U.S. stock exchanges could also have adverse effects for Americans—those who hold stock in the Chinese companies.
“Now, they are American shareholders, but the reality is that long term, the value of the company is the value of the company,” he says.
Trump has taken additional steps beyond the tariffs imposed on China. Last week, he declared a national emergency over threats to the U.S. posed by foreign tech companies, a move many perceived as a blow to Chinese telecommunications equipment company Huawei.
Trump is reportedly considering imposing limits on the Chinese tech firm Hikivison, which produces surveillance technology used by the Chinese government to track members of the country’s Uighur minority, about 1 million of whom have been detained in internment camps.
Larry Kudlow: U.S. needs to ‘kick butt’ to get trade deal with China
White House chief economic adviser Larry Kudlow on Thursday defended President Donald Trump's combative approach to trade negotiations, but acknowledged there aren’t any formal plans yet for a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the G-20 leaders summit later this month.
"You know how you get from here to there, Fred? You kick some butt," Kudlow said during an on-stage conversation with Fred Bergsten, the president emeritus of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "You kick some butt, in my best economic analytical quantitative regression analysis."
Kudlow‘s comments on the Trump administration's philosophy toward persuading China and other trading countries to lower their barriers were made before an audience of economists that has been skeptical about Trump's use of tariffs to pressure other countries to change their behavior. But Kudlow argued the strong-arm tactics were needed, especially with Beijing.
"We didn't start this," Kudlow said. "What I will call the China problem has been going on for a long time, several decades. But President Trump is the first guy in these several decades to take strong actions to remedy a very unbalanced trading relationship, where the Chinese have violated international trade law."
Bergsten pushed back, arguing it was far from clear that the "butt-kicking approach" would work on a country as big as China. In addition, many American companies rely on imports from China to make final goods. Increasing the price of those items makes American companies less competitive with other suppliers and hurts their exports, Bergsten said.
A speed read on global trade news — weekday mornings, in your inbox.
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.
So far, Trump has imposed a 25 percent tariff on $250 billion worth of Chinese goods and has initiated action to impose the same duty on almost all remaining Chinese products, worth about another $300 billion. The next batch includes many consumer goods like cell phones, clothing, footwear, toys, televisions and other electronics.
Trump told reporters on Wednesday that he has no date in mind for when he will decide whether to impose additional tariffs on China.
"No, I have no deadline. My deadline is what's up here," Trump said, pointing to his head.
Trade talks between the two countries broke down in May after Trump accused the Chinese of backsliding on some previous commitments. However, both leaders are expected to attend the June 28-29 G-20 meeting in Osaka, Japan, raising hopes for a bilateral meeting to get negotiations back on track.
However, with just two weeks until the G-20 summit, there are still no "formalized" plans for a Trump-Xi meeting, Kudlow said.
After first saying he did not want to comment of the possibility of the two leaders not meeting, Kudlow darkly hinted Trump could respond negatively to such a snub.
"My president has indicated a strong desire to sit and meet. He's also indicated if the meeting doesn't come to pass, there may be consequences," Kudlow said, apparently referring to Trump's statement earlier this week that he would impose tariffs on the remaining $300 billion worth of Chinese goods in that scenario.
China has already imposed retaliatory duties on about $110 billion worth of American exports, which is about 80 to 90 percent of what it buys from the United States. If Trump does impose additional duties, Beijing could respond by hitting the remaining U.S. goods or taking other actions against companies doing business in China.
Trump claims that China is bearing the brunt of his tariffs, even though they are actually paid by the companies that import the goods. In that vein, Kudlow argued the impact of the tariffs on U.S. consumer prices is "very, very small" because American companies can buy the same product from other countries, rather than suppliers in China.
Kudlow was asked whether Trump needed a deal with China for his strategy to be a success, or whether the Trump administration would be equally satisfied with indefinitely leaving duties on potentially as much as $550 billion worth of Chinese goods. He responded by saying he did not understand the question.
On another point, he dismissed recent Chinese calls for "a more balanced agreement" than was on the table earlier this year.
"We can't have a so-called balanced agreement, because we have such an unbalanced relationship," Kudlow said. "There's a long of wrongs that need to be righted from the standpoint of international trading rules."
Cramer: Trump is ‘hungry for tariffs’ and trade talks are one tweet away from ‘blowing up’
Washington is close to placing tariffs on the rest of Chinese goods, Jim Cramer says.
The move could come in the next two weeks, he speculates.
“I don’t think people realize the president is hungry for tariffs,” he says.
CNBC’s Jim Cramer said Monday the Trump administration is close to placing additional tariffs on Chinese goods as the yearlong trade war drags on.
The Chinese are ’one tweet away from blowing it up, ” Cramer said on “Squawk on the Street. ” Beijing has yet to purchase American goods as agreed upon, he added.
Last week, President Donald Trump tweeted that China “is letting us down” by not buying the goods “that they said they would.” The increased purchases would not only help cut the U.S.’s trade deficit with China but help farmers, as Trump seeks reelection in 2020.
“We’re about to get tariffs any day now,” Cramer added. “I don’t think people realize the president is hungry for tariffs.”
Trump in May slapped 25% tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods and has threatened duties on an additional $325 billion of goods as trade negotiations continue. The additional tariffs would effectively cover all Chinese imports in the United States.
But Washington agreed to hold off on raising levies as long as China would buy more U.S. agricultural products, after the leaders of the world’s two largest economies met last month.
And it’s a move that Cramer doesn’t think Trump will hold onto much longer.
“They (Chinese leaders) better stop playing politics and better start ordering, because most of the industrial companies that I talk to are ready for the next big increase, maybe within the next two weeks,” the “Mad Money ” host said. “We’re about to get tariffs of $300 billion any day now.”
A White House spokesman was not immediately available for comment.
The tariffs have been costly for Beijing, with China reporting last week it grewjust 6.2% in its second quarter. It’s the weakest rate reported in at least 27 years, according to the country’s statistics bureau.
“They better stop playing politics and start ordering,” Cramer said.
President Donald Trump abruptly escalated his trade war with China, announcing that he would impose a 10 per cent tariff on US$300 billion in Chinese imports that aren’t yet subject to U.S. duties after setbacks in negotiations with Beijing.
The new tariff will be imposed beginning Sept. 1, he said in a tweet. Another US$250 billion in Chinese goods are already subject to a 25 per cent U.S. tariff.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer returned from talks with Chinese counterparts in Shangai this week without reporting much progress. Negotiations have been at an impasse since May after the U.S. said the Chinese reneged on provisions of a tentative deal.
Our representatives have just returned from China where they had constructive talks having to do with a future Trade Deal. We thought we had a deal with China three months ago, but sadly, China decided to re-negotiate the deal prior to signing. More recently, China agreed to...
Replying to @realDonaldTrump
...buy agricultural product from the U.S. in large quantities, but did not do so. Additionally, my friend President Xi said that he would stop the sale of Fentanyl to the United States – this never happened, and many Americans continue to die! Trade talks are continuing, and...
...during the talks the U.S. will start, on September 1st, putting a small additional Tariff of 10% on the remaining 300 Billion Dollars of goods and products coming from China into our Country. This does not include the 250 Billion Dollars already Tariffed at 25%...
State-run Chinese media called the Shanghai talks “pragmatic.” The two sides confirmed they had discussed increasing Chinese imports of U.S. agricultural products, which have fallen dramatically this year, and that they would meet again in September in Washington.
U.S. stocks pared gains on the news, while yields on 10-year Treasuries fell to the lowest since 2016.
Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping met at the Group of 20 summit in Osaka, Japan in June in what the U.S. said was an effort to get the talks back on track. But Trump said that China failed to fulfill a handshake agreement with Xi to buy more U.S. agricultural products.
Trump also said that Xi hasn’t met a promise to crackdown on U.S. shipments of fentanyl, a dangerous opioid that has killed tens of thousands of Americans in recent years. “Many Americans continue to die,” Trump said in a tweet.
The delay in tariffs comes as the Trump administration faces mounting pressure from businesses and community groups who say the continuing trade war with China is hurting them.CreditCreditEtienne Laurent/EPA, via Shutterstock
The Trump administration on Tuesday narrowed the list of Chinese products it plans to impose new tariffs on as of Sept. 1, delaying levies on cellphones, laptop computers, toys and other goods and announcing exclusions for other products for various reasons.
The United States trade representative’s office said that a new 10 percent tariff on roughly half the Chinese goods imported into the United States would still take effect on Sept. 1 as announced by President Trump.
But tariffs on consumer electronics, video game consoles, certain toys, computer monitors and some footwear and clothing items are being delayed until Dec. 15, giving retailers time to stockpile the products they need for the back-to-school and holiday shopping seasons.
The administration added that certain products were being removed from the tariff list “based on health, safety, national security and other factors.”
Liu He, China’s vice premier and the country lead trade negotiator, spoke with Robert Lighthizer, the United States trade representative, and Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, on Tuesday, and the three agreed to speak again in two weeks, the state-run Xinhua News Agency reported.
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump criticized China for not making large purchases of American farm goods, suggesting that the tariffs might force them into action.
“As usual, China said they were going to be buying ‘big’ from our great American Farmers,” he wrote. “So far they have not done what they said. Maybe this will be different!”
Trump was so angry after China’s trade retaliation that he wanted to double tariffs
President Trump wanted to double tariff rates on Chinese goods last month after Beijing’s latest retaliation in the trade war before settling on a smaller increase, three sources tell CNBC.
Trump was outraged after he learned Aug. 23 that China had formalized plans to slap duties on $75 billion in U.S. products in response to new tariffs from Washington on Sept. 1.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer then enlisted multiple CEOs to call Trump and warn him about the impact such a move would have on the stock market and the economy.
President Donald Trump awaits the arrival of Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani at the White House in Washington, July 9, 2019.
Carlos Barria | Reuters
President Donald Trump wanted to double tariff rates on Chinese goods last month after Beijing’s latest retaliation in a boiling trade war before settling on a smaller increase, three sources told CNBC.
The president was outraged after he learned Aug. 23 that China had formalized plans to slap duties on $75 billion in U.S. products in response to new tariffs from Washington on Sept. 1. His initial reaction, communicated to aides on a White House trade call held that day, was to suggest doubling existing tariffs, according to three people briefed on the matter.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer then enlisted multiple CEOs to call the president and warn him about the impact such a move would have on the stock market and the economy.
He settled on a 5% hike in tariff rates on about $550 billion in Chinese products, which he announced in an Aug. 23 tweet after the market close.
In the following days, both Mnuchin and White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said Trump’s only regret was not raising tariffs higher.
What the ‘Predictably Irrational’ author says not to do when the stock market tanks
The revelation that Trump wanted to double duties comes on a day when fears about the trade war between the world’s two largest economies helped to sink major U.S. stock indexes. Both the U.S. and China imposed new tariffs on some goods Sunday.
Earlier Tuesday, Trump suggested he could take even more drastic action to crack down on China’s trade practices if he wins reelection next year without a new trade agreement in place.
“Deal would get MUCH TOUGHER!” he wrote in a tweet.
We are doing very well in our negotiations with China. While I am sure they would love to be dealing with a new administration so they could continue their practice of “ripoff USA”($600 B/year),16 months PLUS is a long time to be hemorrhaging jobs and companies on a long-shot....
The trade war has contributed to investor concerns about a global economic slowdown. New economic data Tuesday did not help: The U.S. manufacturing sector contracted in August for the first time in three years.
Trump has hit China with tariffs as he pushes Beijing to change what he calls unfair trade practices. Earlier Tuesday, he said, “We are doing very well in our negotiations with China” on a deal.
U.S. and Chinese negotiators are set to meet in September, though they have not set a specific date.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Treasury Department declined to comment.
During an Oval Office press conference this week, the President told reports that the United States is currently not interesting in broaching the subject of Huawei as part of increasingly heated trade conversations with China. The statement appears to run counter to pat suggestions that he was willing to discuss the U.S. government’s blacklist of the electronics giant during trade talks.
“It’s a national security concern,” Trump said. “Huawei is a big concern of our military, of our intelligence agencies, and we are not doing business with Huawei. And we’ll see what happens with respect to China, but Huawei has been not a player that we want to talk about right now.”
Huawei’s U.S. blacklisting stems from both concerns over potential links to security and spying, as well as alleged sanctions violations. Trump has, however, previously conflated those issues brewing trade war between the superpowers, suggesting that a ban could be lifted with a new U.S.-China deal.
"We are not doing business with Huawei," President Trump says about the Chinese telecom equipment maker. "It will stop almost completely in a very short period of time, and we'll see what happens with respect to China." https://abcn.ws/2zPAAxt
Recent discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping helped ease restrictions against the company, which could be faced with devastating consequences if a full ban on partnerships with U.S. companies like Google is enacted. Trump also used the question to once again suggest that the toll of tariffs could be avoided if U.S. companies no longer relied on Chinese components and manufacturing.
The new comments appear to find Trump temporarily closing the door to discussions about Huawei in future meetings with the Chinese President, though he did not elaborate further.
The phrase “new cold war” should never have been coined. Nothing in the original stand off between the Soviet Union and the US could prepare the global economy for what Donald Trump is demanding of America’s trading partners. Moscow and Washington existed in separate orbits. Now the rest of the world is being asked to make a choice between China and the US, two intimately entwined economies. Nor does the label “trade war” begin to capture the dimensions of what this implies. America’s partners are being pressured to eject Huawei, China’s leading telecoms equipment supplier, from their 5G networks. But Mr Trump’s all-or-nothing ultimatum is by no means confined to Huawei. Almost every Chinese product is now under suspicion of concealing the “Manchurian chip” — backdoor technology that can lie dormant until it is activated. Israel, for example, is being asked to dump a Chinese construction company that is deepening the port of Haifa. It is also under pressure to cut ties with another Chinese contractor that is building a metro in Tel Aviv. Barring commodities such as soyabean or pork, the internet of things makes almost every product a potential dual-use technology in a future US-China conflict. They used to say ploughshares could be converted into swords and vice versa. How about refrigerators? Or children’s toys? Once you start down the road of excluding anything with Chinese-embedded chips, it is hard to know where to stop. The line between legitimate national security concerns and outright paranoia is perilously thin. That line was obliterated at a conference in Paris this week with the misleadingly dull title “International cooperation on artificial intelligence”. In reality the gathering — co-hosted by the Washington-based Atlantic Council — was the first effort to stimulate talks between the US and China on the future of AI, which covers pretty much the future of everything, including warfare. A Trump administration official, whom I cannot name under the gathering’s “Chatham House rule”, opened by declaring that the US would not co-operate with China on AI while it remained authoritarian. Companies around the world had to choose between two AI systems, said the official. One, led by the US, was based on trust and openness. The other, China, was closed and “malicious”. The latter was exporting “authoritarian software” to every continent. A Chinese official responded by saying that the US killed innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Nobody is perfect in human rights,” he said. The exchange almost ended the conference before it began. It offered a troubling foretaste of how much could go wrong between the world’s two great powers. The French co-hosts, which included two former prime ministers, could only make forlorn pleas for dialogue. It is an open question whether Mr Trump will agree to a ceasefire with China in their trade war over the coming weeks. Worries about his re-election prospects in 2020 suggest Mr Trump might go for some kind of truce. Such a deal could even include a brief reprieve for Huawei. Quite how he would sell that one to the increasingly hawkish bipartisan voices back home is another matter. Democrats would be sure to attack him for folding too cheaply. Mr Trump’s short-term actions are unpredictable. But his larger China strategy is unchanging. It is hard to overstate its radicalism. Over the past 40 years, the US has taken a “win-win” approach to China. The more it could be bound into the global economy, the freer its political system would become. Reality has belied that theory. China is considerably less free today than it was in 2001 when it joined the World Trade Organization. Its social credit system, which ranks citizens based on their behaviour, offers an Orwellian vision of how people can be controlled by authoritarian software. Yet its economy is about three times larger than it was then. Mr Trump is thus turning that strategy on its head. We have moved from a “win-win” American vision of globalisation to “win-lose”. In fact, what Mr Trump is pursuing is closer to “lose-lose” — everybody loses if globalisation goes into reverse. Under Mr Trump’s plan, the US ultimately wins because it would lose more slowly than China. The Paris AI gathering this week was supposed to be about the implications of machine learning. A century after the first world war, what it highlighted was the urgent need for human learning. firstname.lastname@example.org
Companies Are Already Looking For Alternatives To China, But Moving Complex Supply Chains Isn't Easy
President Trump has “ordered” American companies to immediately start looking for an alternative to China. Most companies that I have talked to are long past debating that question – they have already decided that the trade war is a long-term problem and they have to diversify their manufacturing bases out of China. The problem is moving their supply chains.
A lithium-ion battery inside the rear case of an Apple Inc. iPhone. Photographer: Brent Lewin/Bloomberg
We typically think of suppliers in “tiers.” My tier 1 suppliers provide me with major components and subsystems; my suppliers’ tier 1s (my tier 2s) in turn feed them, and so on. It is not at all unusual to have five or six tiers or even more. The challenge with this tiering is that it is very hard to keep track of all the tier 3s, tier 4s, and lower down. It’s even harder when you tell them you want to move out of China to wherever your new factory happens to be, because many of them have made significant on the ground investments in buildings, equipment, and trained people, and they aren’t necessarily prepared to move.
Today In: Industry
The good news (sort of) is that we have seen this movie before. For many consumer products like electronics or clothing when companies first moved into China in the 1980s and 1990s, companies organized logistics hubs that sourced components from all over the world and kitted them for assembly in China’s newly established special economic zones. Often these hubs were in Hong Kong, which had no customs duties so material could flow in and out easily and quickly. I remember visiting one factory in Dongguan that would order several hundred thousand parts kits for TVs or DVD players from Hong Kong every day. They assembled the product and then sent everything back to Hong Kong for export or to the next step in production.
Back in those days, if you engaged in this kind of manufacturing in China, you were not allowed to ship product into the Chinese market unless you paid import duties and various taxes. But in a clever move, the Chinese government ruled that if you had greater than 50% local content, you could import into what was then a nascent but fast-growing consumer market. So companies scrambled to find local suppliers. I remember talking to one phone manufacturer who invested heavily to help a Chinese company improve its battery technology, because sourcing Chinese batteries was an easy way to increase the local content quickly. That Chinese battery company today is a world leader.
Localization of the supply chain was one of the major themes of Chinese manufacturing in the early 2000s, and many Tier 1 and 2 suppliers moved or established new factories in China to be close to their customers. The other tiers followed. The result was that by 2010, many products coming out of China had a great deal of local content with only minimal dependence on imports. And for many of those products today, China has become the dominant worldwide source.
The Samsung Electronics Vietnam Co. Plant at Yen Phong Industrial Park in Bac Ninh Province, Vietnam. Samsung Electronics Co. and its affiliate had to build a factory town with hundreds of foreign component suppliers to support its operations there.
I have spent several weeks over the last month traveling around East and South Asia, visiting factories and logistics operations, and talking to many business leaders. One CEO that I spoke with described the new world order as one in which country of origin is an important feature of the product. This is reminiscent of the days of the Multi-Fiber Agreement when manufacturers shipped clothing to be finished in different countries who had unfilled import quotas that enabled them to ship into the United States market. I think we are headed for a world of regionalized manufacturing in which production location choices will be based as much on political as on economic choices.
So I don’t think the President needs to convince companies anymore. Almost everyone knows they have to do something if a Chinese factory is somewhere in their supply chain. But also remember many of today’s managers have grown up in the relatively benign trading environment of the past three decades. They aren’t used to this kind of instability and uncertainty around trade. As we move into the next chapter of globalization, a lot of people will be trying to figure it out.
James Politi in Washington and Peter Wells and Colby Smith in New York 47 MINUTES AGOPrint this page0 The White House is weighing a plan to stop Chinese companies listing on US exchanges in a move that would take its trade war with China to Wall Street. President Donald Trump’s advisers are exploring steps to limit financial investments between the US and China, according to people briefed on the plans. Other options include curbing the ability of US government pension funds to buy Chinese equities. Beijing is preparing to mark the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China with a national celebration next week and is due to have new trade talks with the US in October. A widening of the US-China economic conflict into the arena of capital markets has long been pushed by hawks in Washington, particularly Marco Rubio, the Republican senator from Florida, and like-minded officials within the administration. But it has been resisted by other Trump advisers who fear that it could deal a fresh blow to markets and undermine investor confidence. As of February this year, 156 Chinese companies with a total market capitalisation of $1.2tn were listed on the biggest US stock exchanges, according to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, with at least 11 of them being state-owned. The administration’s move, which was first reported by Bloomberg, prompted a sharp fall in the shares of New York-listed Chinese companies and a weakening of the renminbi. Recommended Asia-Pacific economy Asia’s emerging economies are winning US-China trade war Shortly after the report, Alibaba shares were down 4 per cent and Baidu dropped 2 per cent. The depository receipts of Tencent and online retailer JD.com were down 2 per cent and 3 per cent, respectively. China’s renminbi, traded in offshore foreign exchange markets outside the mainland, weakened by as much as 0.4 per cent, a sizeable move for the currency, but tempered that decline to be 0.2 per cent softer at 7.14 per US dollar at 1pm New York time. After a flurry of tariff escalations rattled markets in August, US and Chinese officials have been exploring ways to reduce tensions ahead of next month’s new round of talks. US and Japan announce details of new trade deal Potential capital markets restrictions by the US would come in the wake of China’s decision this month to scrap caps on foreign investors’ purchases of domestic stocks and bonds. Action by the Trump administration could therefore stymie the potential flow of international capital into the Asian country. “If this most extreme retaliation takes place, we will see the potential for additional escalation,” said Cesar Rojas, Citigroup global economist. “This is another negotiation strategy. It is showing what would be the cost of not co-operating with the US and not giving in to concessions.” If the US decides to proceed, designing the specific measures to restrict Chinese access to US capital markets will not be simple, and could be challenged. “I don't think it's as simple as turning off the spigot,” said Patrick Healy, chief executive of Issuer Network, a listings consultant. “The exchange has to cite why the company is being delisted and the company gets a chance to contest the delisting.”