Trade truce with China is hailed, but it may not be enough to stop shortages

Los Angeles Times - May 12th, 2025

China and the United States have agreed to a temporary truce in their ongoing trade war, reducing tariffs on each other's imports for a 90-day period as they negotiate a more permanent trade deal. This development has been welcomed by investors, leading to a significant rise in major stock indices like the Dow Jones, S&P 500, and Nasdaq. The deal will see the U.S. lowering tariffs on Chinese goods to 30% from 145%, while China will reduce its tariffs on U.S. imports to 10% from 125%. Despite the market's positive response, there are concerns about the lingering effects on consumers, including supply shortages and price increases due to previous weeks of uncertainty, along with potential volatility as the deadline for a lasting agreement approaches. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who led the negotiations, also secured China's commitment to reduce non-tariff barriers established after April 2.

The temporary agreement serves as a reset to pre-trade war tariff levels, initiated by Trump on April 2, which had caused a significant decline in commercial shipping and warnings of an impending recession. The Trump administration intends to develop a mechanism to rebalance the trade relationship with China, targeting government subsidies and the $400-billion U.S. trade deficit with China. The next round of negotiations will take cues from a previous 'Phase One' agreement. However, experts warn of ongoing challenges, including disrupted supply chains and potential shortages during key retail seasons. President Trump, while praising the deal, noted that it does not include tariffs on certain goods like cars and pharmaceuticals, and he criticized the European Union for its pricing practices on pharmaceuticals, hinting at further trade disputes on the horizon.

Stock Market Trump Administration European Union Scott Bessent Supply Chain Disruption Us China Trade War Trade Negotiations Tariff Reduction Phase One Agreement Pharmaceuticals

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely and relevant overview of the temporary trade truce between the U.S. and China, highlighting key economic impacts and market reactions. It is generally accurate in its reporting of core facts, but some specific details require further verification. The story could benefit from a more balanced representation of perspectives, particularly from the Chinese side, and greater source attribution to enhance credibility. While the article is clear and accessible, its engagement and controversial potential are limited by the lack of diverse viewpoints and in-depth analysis. Overall, the article serves as a useful summary of the current trade situation, but it could be strengthened by addressing these areas for improvement.

Accuracy

The story presents several factual claims that align with reported events, such as the agreement between the U.S. and China to reduce tariffs temporarily. The core facts about the tariff reductions and the positive market reaction are consistent with other news reports. However, specific details like the exact tariff percentages and the characterization of 'Liberation Day' require further verification. Additionally, the story includes speculative elements about future supply chain disruptions and economic impacts, which are not immediately verifiable.

Balance

The article primarily focuses on the U.S. perspective, particularly the Trump administration's views and actions. It lacks a balanced representation of China's perspective or any commentary from Chinese officials, which could provide a more rounded view of the situation. The story also emphasizes the positive market reaction and potential economic benefits without equally highlighting the risks or criticisms of the temporary truce.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow of information. The language is straightforward, making it accessible to a general audience. However, some sections could benefit from more detailed explanations, particularly regarding the economic terms and potential impacts of the agreement. The tone remains neutral, although it occasionally leans towards a positive portrayal of the U.S. administration's actions.

Source quality

The article does not provide specific sources or direct quotes from officials, relying instead on general statements about the U.S. Treasury Secretary and unnamed experts. This lack of direct attribution weakens the credibility and reliability of the information presented. The absence of diverse sources or expert opinions from both sides of the trade agreement limits the depth of the analysis.

Transparency

While the article discusses the context of the trade negotiations and the historical background of the tariff increases, it lacks detailed explanations of the methodology behind the tariff reductions or the specific terms of the agreement. The article does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest or biases, which could affect the impartiality of the reporting.