Tariffs on China set to rise to at least 104% on Wednesday, White House says

CNN - Apr 8th, 2025

President Donald Trump is implementing an additional 84% levy on all Chinese imports, as announced by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. This decision will subject all goods from China to a minimum tariff of 104%. The move comes after Beijing's failure to retract its decision to impose 34% retaliatory tariffs on US goods, prompting Trump to add another 50% to the planned increase. Leavitt emphasized the administration's firm stance against what it perceives as China's mistreatment of American workers, stating that Trump will not back down in the face of economic pressure. While she suggested that China is interested in negotiating, no specific terms for easing the tariffs were disclosed.

This development escalates the ongoing trade conflict between the United States and China, which constitutes a significant portion of their bilateral trade relationship. In the previous year, China was the second-largest source of imports for the US, with trade valued at $439 billion. The imposition of mutual tariffs threatens to impact domestic industries adversely, potentially leading to job losses. This situation is evolving rapidly and carries broad economic implications, as both nations stand to suffer from heightened trade barriers, impacting global markets and economic stability.

Donald Trump China Tariffs Economic Policy Karoline Leavitt Us China Trade War Retaliatory Tariffs Trade Tensions

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

5.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely and relevant examination of the escalating U.S.-China trade war, focusing on the significant tariff increases imposed by the U.S. It successfully highlights the potential economic impact and public interest in the issue. However, the article's accuracy and balance are somewhat compromised by a lack of diverse perspectives and detailed verification of key claims. The reliance on a singular source from the U.S. government limits the depth of analysis, and the absence of Chinese viewpoints or independent expert opinions affects the overall reliability and comprehensiveness of the report. Despite these weaknesses, the article remains clear and accessible, offering a straightforward narrative that captures the urgency of the situation. To enhance its impact and engagement potential, the article could benefit from a more balanced representation of perspectives and a deeper exploration of the broader economic implications of the trade conflict.

Accuracy

The story provides specific figures regarding the tariffs, such as the 104% total tariff on Chinese imports, which are critical to verify for factual accuracy. The claim about the additional 50% tariff imposed after China's retaliatory measures needs confirmation. The story accurately reflects the tense trade situation between the U.S. and China, but lacks detailed verification of these figures and the context surrounding them. The mention of trade volumes between the U.S. and China requires precise verification, as these numbers significantly impact the narrative's credibility. The economic impact of such tariffs, including potential layoffs, is mentioned but not substantiated with data or expert opinions, which diminishes the reliability of these claims.

Balance

The article primarily presents the U.S. perspective, particularly focusing on President Trump's actions and statements. It quotes the White House Press Secretary extensively, which may skew the narrative towards a U.S.-centric viewpoint. The Chinese perspective is mentioned briefly through their retaliatory tariffs, but the article lacks direct quotes or insights from Chinese officials or experts. This imbalance may lead to a one-sided understanding of the trade conflict, omitting important perspectives from China that could provide a more comprehensive view of the situation.

Clarity

The article is written in a clear and straightforward manner, making it relatively easy to follow. The language is direct, and the structure logically presents the sequence of events. However, the lack of detailed context or background information on the trade war may leave some readers with an incomplete understanding of the broader implications. While the tone is neutral, the focus on U.S. perspectives without sufficient context from the Chinese side can affect the overall clarity of the situation.

Source quality

The article relies heavily on statements from the White House Press Secretary, which provides a credible but singular source. There is a lack of diverse sources, such as trade experts, economists, or Chinese government representatives, which would enhance the depth and reliability of the reporting. The absence of these varied perspectives limits the article's ability to present a well-rounded and authoritative account of the trade situation.

Transparency

The article does not adequately disclose the basis for its claims, particularly regarding the figures and economic impacts mentioned. It lacks transparency in explaining the methodology behind the tariff calculations or the potential economic consequences. Additionally, there is no mention of any conflicts of interest or biases that might affect the reporting. This lack of transparency can hinder readers' ability to fully trust the information presented.