Trump officially raises retaliatory tariffs against China – including 90% fee on cheap goods from US adversary

New York Post - Apr 9th, 2025

President Trump has amended an executive order to increase tariffs on Chinese imports by 50%, resulting in a total of 104% in new import fees. This decision comes as a countermeasure to China’s recent announcement of a 34% tariff on US goods, which was itself a response to Trump's earlier decision to impose reciprocal tariffs on 90 countries based on trade imbalances. The amendment also affects tariffs on de minimus shipments from China, with duties on these low-value goods set to rise from 30% to 90%. Trump's move is aimed at addressing what he perceives as a threat to the national security and economy of the United States.

This development marks another escalation in the ongoing trade tensions between the United States and China, with significant implications for international trade relations and economic stability. By targeting de minimus shipments, the amendment also impacts a wide range of consumer goods that cross the US-China border. The increased tariffs could lead to higher prices for consumers and further strain on businesses that rely on Chinese imports. As the situation evolves, it remains to be seen how China will respond and what further measures the US might take, highlighting the precarious nature of international trade under the current administration.

Trump China Tariffs Us China Relations Trade War Executive Order Harmonized Tariff Schedule De Minimus Shipments

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

5.0

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article addresses a timely and significant issue in international trade, focusing on President Trump's tariff increases against China. While it effectively communicates the main points and maintains a neutral tone, the lack of source attribution, context, and balance limits its accuracy and depth. The absence of diverse perspectives and detailed analysis restricts its potential impact and engagement. To enhance its quality, the article could benefit from more comprehensive reporting, including expert opinions and verification of key claims. Despite these shortcomings, the topic's inherent controversy and public interest ensure its relevance.

Accuracy

The story makes several claims that require verification, such as President Trump raising tariffs on China by 50%, resulting in a total of 104%. This specific figure needs to be checked against official trade documents. The claim that China's retaliatory tariffs are set at 34% also requires confirmation from Chinese government sources. Furthermore, the article mentions a significant increase in tariffs on de minimus shipments from China, which should be verified through U.S. customs updates. While the narrative aligns with known tensions in U.S.-China trade relations, the lack of direct citations or official statements in the article itself affects its overall accuracy.

Balance

The article primarily presents the U.S. perspective, focusing on President Trump's actions and justifications for the tariff increases. It lacks a balanced representation of China's stance or any counterarguments to the U.S. position. The absence of Chinese viewpoints or reactions from international trade experts contributes to an imbalanced presentation. Including perspectives from affected industries or economic analysts could provide a more comprehensive view of the issue.

Clarity

The article is generally clear in its presentation of information, with a straightforward structure and language. It effectively communicates the main points regarding the tariff increases and their purported justification. However, the lack of detailed context and supporting information can lead to confusion about the broader implications and accuracy of the claims. The tone is neutral, focusing on factual statements without emotional language.

Source quality

The article does not cite any sources or provide direct quotes from officials, reducing the credibility of the information presented. It relies on general statements attributed to President Trump without offering any evidence or documentation, such as the executive order or statements from the U.S. Trade Representative. The lack of attribution to authoritative sources diminishes the reliability of the reporting.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency in its reporting. There is no explanation of the methodology used to gather information or any disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. The lack of context about the broader implications of the tariffs or historical background on U.S.-China trade relations limits the reader's understanding of the issue. Transparency could be improved by providing more detailed explanations and context.