WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration this week will unveil a list of advanced technology Chinese imports targeted for U.S. tariffs to punish Beijing over technology transfer policies, a move expected to intensify trade tensions between the world’s two largest economies.
U.S. tariffs on $50 billion (35.59 billion pounds) to $60 billion worth of annual imports is expected to be levied on products benefiting from Beijing’s “Made in China 2025” industrial development programme, but it may be more than two months before the import curbs take effect, administration officials have said.
The U.S. Trade Representative’s office needs to unveil the list of products by Friday under President Donald Trump’s China tariff proclamation signed on March 22.
The tariffs are aimed at forcing changes to Chinese government policies that USTR says results in the “uneconomic” transfer of U.S. intellectual property to Chinese companies.
The agency’s “Section 301” investigation authorizing the tariffs alleges China has systematically sought to misappropriate U.S. intellectual property through joint venture requirements, unfair technology licensing rules, purchases of U.S. technology firms with state funding and outright theft.
China has denied that its laws require technology transfers and has threatened to retaliate against any U.S. tariffs with trade sanctions of its own, with potential targets such as U.S. soybeans, aircraft or heavy equipment.
On Sunday, Beijing slapped extra tariffs of up to 25 percent on 128 U.S. products including frozen pork, as well as wine and certain fruits and nuts in response to steep U.S. tariffs on imports of aluminium and steel announced last month by the Trump administration.
Fears have arisen that the two countries will spiral into a trade war that will crush global growth.
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said last week that Section 301 tariffs would focus on Chinese industries benefiting from the Made in China 2025 plan, which aims to replace advanced technology imports with domestic products.
“China in my view brazenly has released this China 2025 plan and basically told the rest of the world, ‘We’re going to dominate every single emerging industry of the future and therefore your economies aren’t going to have any future,” Navarro told Bloomberg Television.
“The Section 301, which is on intellectual theft and forced transfer, is specifically designed to address those kinds of things,” Navarro said.
The state-led 2025 programme targets 10 strategic industries: advanced information technology, robotics, aircraft, shipbuilding and marine engineering, advanced rail equipment, new energy vehicles, electrical generation equipment, agricultural machinery, pharmaceuticals and advanced materials.
“Foreign technology acquisition through various means remains a prime focus under Made in China 2025 because China is still catching up in many of the areas prioritised for development,” USTR said in its report justifying the tariffs.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has said that preserving America’s technological edge is “the future of the U.S. economy.”
Reports that the tariff list may also include consumer goods such as clothing and footwear drew strong protests from U.S. business groups, which argued that it would raise prices for U.S. consumers.
While there have been contacts between senior members of the Trump administration and their Chinese counterparts since Trump announced his intention to impose tariffs, there has been little evidence of intensive negotiations to forestall them.
“The administration is following the Japan model from the 1980s,” said a tech industry executive. “They’ll publish a Federal Register notice of tariffs on certain products, then try to reach a negotiated settlement over the next 60 days.”During his first stint at USTR in the Reagan administration, Lighthizer employed similar tactics to win voluntary Japanese export restraints on steel and autos.
Wendy Cutler, a former deputy USTR in charge of Asia negotiations, said that addressing the sweeping intellectual property allegations identified by USTR would require major changes to China’s industrial policy. A 60-day settlement may not be realistic in that case.
“I think they’ve set up a high bar for what they need to achieve, in order not to impose these types of tariffs and investment restrictions,” Cutler said.
Reporting by David Lawder; Editing by Peter Cooney and Susan Thomas