China raising its retaliatory tariff on the US to 84%, up from 34%

Apnews - Apr 9th, 2025

China has declared its intention to 'fight to the end' amidst an escalating trade war with the United States, announcing that it will raise tariffs on American goods to 84% starting Thursday. This move comes as a direct response to U.S. President Donald Trump increasing tariffs on Chinese imports to 104%. Additionally, China filed a new suit against the U.S. with the World Trade Organization and imposed further restrictions on American companies operating in China. Among the countermeasures, China added 11 American companies to an 'unreliable entities' list, effectively barring them from certain business transactions with Chinese firms. These assertive actions follow Trump's termination of trade negotiations with China after escalating tariffs on Chinese goods.

The ongoing trade conflict between the two economic giants is significant as it affects global markets and economic stability. China's Ministry of Commerce criticized the U.S. for not honoring commitments made in the phase 1 trade deal and highlighted that economic exchanges between the nations are roughly balanced when considering services and domestic operations. The ministry warned that U.S. tariff increases could lead to financial market instability, rising inflation, and potential recession in the U.S. This conflict reflects deeper diplomatic tensions and the challenges of reconciling economic policies between the world's largest economies, with broad implications for international trade norms and economic alliances.

Donald Trump China Tariffs United States International Relations Economic Policy Trade War World Trade Organization Ministry Of Commerce

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.4

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely and relevant overview of the escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and China, focusing on recent tariff increases and countermeasures. While the story is generally clear and accessible, it could benefit from a more balanced presentation of perspectives, particularly from the U.S. side. The reliance on Chinese government sources lends credibility, but the inclusion of diverse viewpoints and expert analysis would enhance the depth and impact of the reporting. Overall, the article effectively informs readers about the current state of U.S.-China trade relations, though further verification of specific claims is necessary to ensure full accuracy.

Accuracy

The story presents several factual claims that require verification, such as the specific tariff percentages imposed by both China and the U.S. and the list of American companies affected by China's countermeasures. The claim that China raised its tariffs on American goods to 84% and the U.S. imposed a 104% tariff on Chinese goods needs confirmation from official trade announcements or government sources. Additionally, the assertion that China added 11 American companies to an 'unreliable entities' list should be backed by official lists or statements from the Chinese government. The article accurately reflects the tension between the two nations but lacks precise details and corroboration in some areas, which slightly affects its overall accuracy.

Balance

The article predominantly presents the perspective of the Chinese government, as indicated by the numerous quotes and statements from Chinese officials. While it mentions actions taken by the U.S., such as the tariffs imposed by President Trump, it does not provide an in-depth exploration of the U.S. perspective or any responses from American officials or businesses. This imbalance could lead readers to perceive the situation as being more one-sided than it may actually be. Including viewpoints or responses from the U.S. side would offer a more balanced representation of the trade conflict.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow of information. It effectively outlines the sequence of events and the positions of the involved parties. The language is straightforward, making the complex topic of international trade accessible to a broad audience. However, some sections could benefit from additional context or explanation to enhance understanding, particularly regarding the economic implications of the tariffs.

Source quality

The article cites statements from the Chinese Ministry of Commerce and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which are authoritative sources for China's trade policies. However, it lacks direct quotes or data from U.S. officials or independent trade experts, which would enhance the credibility and depth of the reporting. The involvement of AP researchers and producers from Beijing adds to the reliability, but the absence of diverse sources limits the overall quality of the information provided.

Transparency

The article provides some transparency by including direct quotes from Chinese officials and referencing a white paper on trade. However, it does not clearly disclose the methodology or sources used to verify the claims about tariffs and economic impacts. The lack of detailed explanation regarding the basis for specific claims, such as the trade deficit figures, affects the transparency of the reporting. More explicit disclosure of data sources and methodologies would improve transparency.