China and the United States, who buys what from whom?

The United States bought $439 billion or $439 billion worth of goods from China in 2024. In return, they sold $143.5 billion or $143.5 billion worth of goods to China. The difference of $295 billion or $295 billion between buying and selling is the trade deficit between the two countries.

To address this deficit, US President Donald Trump has increased tariffs on Chinese goods to 145 percent. This means that Chinese goods that will now be sold in the United States will now have to be paid 2.45 times more than the original price. As a result, Chinese goods will now be more expensive in the US market. As a result, Chinese goods will now lose their competitiveness in the US market. China is not sitting still; they have also imposed a 125 percent tariff on US goods.

What will happen due to this policy of 'hitting bricks instead of stones' between the world's two largest economies is the creation of uncertainty in global trade. As a result, the prices and production costs of everything from smartphones to semiconductors and clothing will increase.

China's Ministry of Commerce has said that they will not give up. At the same time, they have accused the United States of violating World Trade Organization rules.

What does the United States sell to China

In 2024, the United States sold goods worth 143.5 billion or 143.5 billion dollars to China. The goods they sold to China were mineral oil, oilseeds, machinery and aircraft. As a single product, the United States sold the most to China was soybeans. Soybeans are mainly used as pig feed.

Let's see what other products the United States mainly sold to China in 2024:

Mineral oil (13.4 billion): Mineral oil sold to China was worth 13.4 billion or 13.4 billion dollars; this mineral was 10.7 percent of total exports.

Oilseeds and oleaginous fruits ($11.5 billion): The United States sold a total of $11.5 billion or $11.5 billion of oilseeds and oleaginous fruits to China last year.

Electrical machinery, equipment and parts ($11.5 billion): The United States sold a total of $11.5 billion or $11.5 billion of these items to China last year. This is 9.1 percent of its total exports.

Nuclear reactors, boilers and equipment ($10.5 billion): These items were sold for a total of $1.5 billion; 8.3 percent of total exports. Aircraft, spacecraft and parts ($10.2 billion): These items were sold for a total of $1.2 billion; 8.1 percent of total exports.

What does the United States buy from China?

In 2024, the United States purchased $439 billion or $439 billion worth of goods from China. The United States mainly buys smartphones, electrical appliances and chips from the country.

Electrical appliances, equipment and parts ($123.8 billion): The country bought $123.8 billion worth of goods from China last year; about 28.2 percent of total exports.

Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and equipment ($82 billion): The country bought $82 billion worth of these goods from China last year; 18.7 percent of total imports.

Toys, games and sporting goods ($30 billion): China bought $30 billion worth of these goods; 6.8 percent of total exports.

Plastics ($19.3 billion): The United States will buy $19.3 billion worth of these goods from China in 2024; about 4.4 percent of total exports.

Furniture, bedding and cushions ($18.5 billion): The United States buys $18.5 billion worth of these goods, or $18.5 billion; about 4.2 percent of total imports.

It appears that among the US states, California, Illinois and Texas import the most goods from China; these states import goods worth 122.76 billion or 122.76 billion dollars, 42 billion or 42.20 billion dollars and 35.9 billion or 35.90 billion dollars respectively.

Texas exports the most; they export a total of 22.5 billion or 22.50 billion dollars worth of goods to China. California is in second place; they export a total of 15 billion or 15 billion dollars worth of goods. It comes in third place with 12 billion or 12 billion dollars worth of goods.

Confusion in the administration’s messaging

Confusion in the administration’s messaging

Chinese President Xi Jinping attends the closing session of the National People's Congress in Beijing on March 11, 2025. 

Pedro Pardo/AFP/Getty Images/File

As it has several times, the administration is insisting that its sudden moves and inconsistent messaging were part of the plan all along.“This is just another great example of how President Trump had a detailed plan from the beginning that’s being executed exactly as directed,” White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller said on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.” He explained the administration’s thinking that such items are vital to US national security and thus required different treatment for “reshoring” factories that make them.

The administration insists its strategy is working, arguing that scores of countries included in the now-paused reciprocal tariffs have rushed to offer stunning deals to Trump to escape American pressure.

The White House is now applying similar logic to China, betting that the might of the US economy will force Xi to offer concessions on long-held grievances that include concerns over market access, intellectual property theft and a vast trade imbalance that Trump insists is proof Beijing is ripping off Washington.

“It’s kind of almost a two-world system. There’s a process about China, and that’s very, very nascent … and then the process for everybody else,” Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, told CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union” on Sunday. “So the process for everybody else is orderly, it’s clear. People are coming to town with great, great offers.”

The Trump approach is risky, and it may fail to take into account the complexities of the US-China relationship and the political dynamics in Beijing. This is because Xi’s attempt to turn his country into a dominant great power is founded in a conceit that the US and other Western powers have historically adopted colonial-style policies to suppress Chinese influence and deprive it of its rightful place in the world. This makes it almost impossible for Xi to be seen as caving to what China regards as US bullying.

Still, the administration has dismissed warnings that China can hurt the US as badly as Washington can hurt it. “They’re playing with a pair of twos,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last week on CNBC. He argued that since the US exports only a fifth of the total value of goods Beijing sends to the US, its economy would come off worse in a tit-for-tat trade war.

That reasoning and Trump’s confidence that his typical brinksmanship and raising of the stakes to intolerable levels, which he honed as a real estate mogul in New York, will be tested in the days to come.

If Trump does manage to reframe the US trading relationship with China, he will claim a significant achievement in a new era of Washington relations with Beijing. For years, presidents of both parties reasoned that by liberalizing China’s previously controlled economy, the US could usher its rival into the global rule-based trading system and promote political reforms inside the country. But that calculus began to change at the end of the Obama administration, and Xi’s nationalistic rule sharpened the economic and geopolitical showdown between the two sides.

Trump’s showdown with China deepens

President Donald Trump is heading into another volatile week of his trade wars facing an urgent need to de-escalate the clash he ignited with China before it inflicts deep damage on the US economy.Chinese President Xi Jinping is so far declining US pressure to call his American counterpart to seek a “deal” after the United States imposed 145% tariffs on its superpower rival, setting off a long-feared direct confrontation.This leaves Trump repeatedly assuring Americans that his “great relationship” with the Chinese leader will head off a crisis but unable to initiate talks in a standoff that risks tanking stock markets again and imposing real hardships on Americans. 

Despite the uncertainty, Trump is putting on a show of relishing multiple fights he set off, and he lapped up a standing ovation as he took a seat cage-side at a UFC mixed martial arts event in Florida on Saturday night. The president, who styles himself as an ultimate political fighter, told reporters his reception was “somewhat legendary” and showed that “we’re doing a good job.”But the president’s conflict with China is a real-world showdown with far higher stakes.The impasse is so serious because the US and Chinese economies are intricately entwined.

 The US relies on China for consumer electronics; rare earth minerals used in the manufacture of electric vehicles and for military applications and robotics; pharmaceuticals used in lifesaving medicines; and more basic staples of daily life, including clothing and shoes. US exports of produce like soybeans and sorghum to China are vital to the livelihoods of American farmers, but the tariffs imposed by both sides are so prohibitive that trade may effectively grind to a halt.Both sides could suffer terribly in a full-blown trade war, and US consumers could be hit by shortages and surging prices. 

But some experts believe that China, owing to its authoritarian system of government, would be willing to impose more pain on its populace to avoid losing what could be a defining struggle with the US.Trump’s capacity to play the long game was called into question when he suddenly paused reciprocal tariffs on dozens of nations last week for 90 days after bond market sell-offs began to hint at a developing financial crisis. 

That climbdown will have been carefully watched in Beijing. And in seeking to ease one sticky situation, Trump exacerbated another — lashing out at China with his 145% tariffs in an apparent effort to save face.As the chaos worsens, the White House added more confusion Friday night, exempting imports of Chinese-made smartphones and computers from the top tariff rate in an apparent acknowledgment that sky-high levies on those items could hammer the tech industry and US consumers.But on Sunday, the administration insisted that such products would still be subject to new tariffs at a lower level in the coming weeks, raising further questions about its apparently unplanned and knee-jerk stances, which have repeatedly scared markets.

“NOBODY is getting ‘off the hook’ for the unfair Trade Balances, and Non Monetary Tariff Barriers, that other Countries have used against us, especially not China which, by far, treats us the worst!” Trump wrote Sunday on Truth Social. “There was no Tariff ‘exception’ announced on Friday. These products are subject to the existing 20% Fentanyl Tariffs, and they are just moving to a different Tariff ‘bucket.’ The Fake News knows this, but refuses to report it,” he went on.

No duty to return illegally deported man to US

 

Trump administration contends it has no duty to return illegally deported man to US

The Trump administration insisted Sunday that it has no legal obligation to arrange for the return of a Maryland man illegally deported from the United States, arguing that a Supreme Court ruling last week only requires officials to admit him into the country if he makes it back from a high-security prison in El Salvador.

Justice Department lawyers told a federal judge that they don’t interpret the Supreme Court’s Thursday ruling — that the administration “facilitate” Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s release — as obligating the administration to do anything more than adjust his immigration status to admit him if El Salvador’s government chooses to release him.

With El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele set to meet President Donald Trump Monday, DOJ attorneys argued the courts have no power to require the administration to engage with the Salvadoran government to reach a diplomatic solution. They contend such a potential order would amount to a violation of the separation of powers and an intrusion into what they allege is unfettered presidential power to conduct foreign relations.“All of those requested orders involve interactions with a foreign sovereign — and potential violations of that sovereignty,” Justice Department attorneys wrote in a seven-page submission to U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis. “[A] federal court cannot compel the Executive Branch to engage in any mandated act of diplomacy or incursion upon the sovereignty of another nation.”

The administration’s position suggests officials do not view the Supreme Court’s order as compelling them to seek Abrego Garcia’s return. The Salvadoran native entered the country illegally around 2011 and had been living in Maryland. The Trump administration has admitted it deported him to El Salvador in violation of a 2019 immigration court order barring his deportation to that country. Though Abrego Garcia was denied asylum, a judge found he could not be sent to his home country because of a legitimate fear of persecution by a local gang.

The administration continued Sunday to flout a Friday order from Xinis to deliver “daily updates” to the court describing its efforts to return Abrego Garcia to the United States. Sunday’s update from Evan Katz, the assistant director of removal operations for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the administration had “no updates” for the judge. A day earlier, in a similarly threadbare update, the administration turned to Michael Kozak, the State Department’s senior bureau official in the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, who said Abrego Garcia was still alive in El Salvador’s CECOT prison.

The administration is also bucking demands from Abrego Garcia’s attorneys that officials detail the arrangement to ship hundreds of foreign nationals to a notorious prison in El Salvador. One of the Sunday filings insists those details are classified and could be subject to attorney-client and state secrets privileges.

US Space Force Greenland base chief fired

 WASHINGTON (AP) — The commander of a U.S. Space Force base in Greenland has been fired after she sent a base-wide email breaking with official messaging following Vice President JD Vance’s visit to the Danish territory that President Donald Trump is seeking to annex.

In a statement late Thursday, the Space Force said Col. Susan Meyers was removed as commander of Pituffik Space Base in Greenland over a “loss of confidence in her ability to lead.”

“Commanders are expected to adhere to the highest standards of conduct, especially as it relates to remaining nonpartisan in the performance of their duties,” the statement said.

Military.com reported Thursday that Meyers sent the base-wide email defending the base’s relationship with Denmark and Greenland following Vance’s visit two weeks ago.A U.S. official confirmed Friday to The Associated Press that Meyers sent the email and its contents showing support for Greenland and Denmark. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to provide additional details not made public.

Greenland is a territory of Denmark, which is a NATO ally of the United States. Trump wants to annex the territory, claiming it’s needed for national security purposes, and Vance's visit in late March set off heated rhetoric between the U.S. and Denmark, with Trump refusing to take the use of military force off the table.

In a post on X late Thursday, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell linked to the Military.com story and said that “actions to undermine the chain of command or to subvert President Trump’s agenda will not be tolerated at the Department of Defense.”

Meyers' firing was the latest in a series of terminations of senior military leaders, including several female leaders.

The Trump administration has previously fired Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti, U.S. Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Linda Fagan and U.S. Navy Vice Adm. Shoshana Chatfield, the only woman on NATO’s military committee.

Other key firings were Gen. CQ Brown Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Gen. Tim Haugh, commander of U.S. Cyber Command and director of the National Security Agency.

Recession in the US, what will happen to the rest of the world?

 Is a recession coming to the United States?

The US investment bank JP Morgan is predicting a recession in the United States and other countries around the world this year if the tariffs imposed by Trump on Wednesday remain in place. According to the company's calculations last Thursday, the tariffs will increase the price of goods in the United States. The price index for consumer goods in the country may increase by about 2 percent in 2025.

JP Morgan analysts say that this year's tariff increase should be seen as a tax increase of about $ 660 billion in the United States. This amount of tax increase is the highest in the past few decades. It will have a significant impact on inflation. In addition, if trading partners take countermeasures against imports of US products to retaliate against the tariffs imposed by Trump, the 'push' on the economy will be even more intense.

In the meantime, retaliation against Trump's tariffs has begun. China has condemned the US action. Beijing has called it 'unilateral oppression'. They have announced a 34 percent tariff on US goods as a countermeasure. The European Union, the largest single market for US goods, has also warned of retaliatory measures. French President Emmanuel Macron has called on European companies to suspend planned investments in the United States.

Trump has been making a slogan since the 2024 presidential election. That is, he will ‘make America rich again’. If his tariffs now cause a major decline in the US economy, then there could be widespread unemployment, bankruptcies and defaults on debt. If this happens, it would be the opposite of Trump’s goal of ‘making America rich’.

Paul Donovan, chief economist at UBS Global Wealth Management, said that the US president can still withdraw or reduce these tariffs, but if the tariffs take effect, it will slow down the pace of the US economy. In a research paper published on Thursday, Deutsche Bank economists also said that there is a risk of an economic recession in the US.

Expatriate income reaches $2.7 billion in 24 days

 The first Eid has come to an end since the fall of the Awami League government in August last year. On this occasion, expatriates from abroad are sending more remittances or expatriate income through legal channels than at any time in the past. Bankers say that mainly because money laundering has decreased, expatriates have chosen legal channels to send their income. As a result, a new record has been set in expatriate income during the month of Ramadan. 2.7 billion US dollars came into the banking channel in the first 24 days of this month. In total, expatriate income came in at 2.52 billion dollars in February. This information has been found in the updated statistics of Bangladesh Bank.

If the current trend of expatriate income continues, bankers expect that the amount of expatriate income may exceed 3 billion US dollars by the end of this month. Officials said that the dollar crisis that was going on in banks has largely been overcome due to the increase in expatriate income. They said that the instability that was there regarding the price of the dollar has also reduced. Banks are now buying expatriate income within the maximum rate of 123 taka set by the central bank.

According to Bangladesh Bank data, in the first 15 days of this month, expatriate income came in at 1.66 billion dollars. Four days later, on March 19, the expatriate income coming through banking channels, i.e. legal channels, stood at $2.25 billion. Of this, $130 million came in on March 19 alone. Again, from March 1 to 22, i.e. the first 22 days of the month, the amount of expatriate income stood at $2.43 billion, which increased to $2.7 billion on March 24.

Usually, expatriate income comes in more than any other month of the year before the two Eids. Last year, expatriate income of $450 million came in in the five days before the holy Eid-ul-Fitr. That is, an average of $90 million came in a day. In the first week of this month, it came in at an average of $110 million and in the second week, it came in at an average of $120 million. Over the next four days, expatriates increased their remittances. During this time, they sent an average of about $150 million daily.

Since the political change in the country in August last year, expatriates have sent more than $2 billion every month for seven consecutive months. The most recent was in February, when expatriates sent $2.528 billion, which is 17 percent more than the same period last year. In January this year, expatriate income was 3 percent higher than the same period last year.

In total, expatriates sent $18.49 billion to the country in the first eight months of the 2024-25 fiscal year, July-March, which is 24 percent more than the same period in the previous fiscal year. In the same period of the previous 2023-24 fiscal year, expatriate income was $14.93 billion.

It is known that the purchase of dollars for expatriate income has now decreased significantly due to competition among banks. As a result, the price of the dollar is within 123 taka. This is also reducing the price of the dollar in importing goods. Earlier, the price of each dollar rose to 128 taka.

Expatriate income is the only non-liable source of dollar supply in the country. Because, no foreign currency has to be spent against this income, or there is no need to pay any liabilities. On the other hand, even if dollars come into the country against export income, foreign currency has to be spent again to import raw materials and equipment. Again, dollars are needed to repay foreign loans. As a result, as expatriate income increases, dollar reserves in the country's central bank increase rapidly.

US: Operation will continue unless Houthis announce end to ship attacks

 The United States has said that the ongoing operation against the Houthis will continue until they announce an end to attacks on ships in the Red Sea. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made the announcement on Sunday local time. But the Houthis have announced that they will continue to retaliate if the US attack continues. Reuters reports

On Saturday night, the US military began attacking various Houthi targets in Yemen. At least 53 people have been killed in the attack, according to the Houthi-run Ministry of Health. Five children and two women are among the dead. 98 people were injured in the attack. However, the Pentagon did not immediately comment on the civilian casualties.

The ongoing attack against the Houthis in the Middle East is the largest US military operation since Trump took office in January. The attack began at a time when Washington is trying to force Tehran to negotiate over its nuclear program by increasing sanctions. A US official told Reuters that the attack could last for weeks.

Houthi leader Abdul Malik al-Houthi said on Sunday that if the US continues its attacks on Yemen, our attacks on its ships in the Red Sea will continue. “If they continue their aggression, we will continue to respond,” he said.

The Houthi political bureau has described the US attack as a “war crime.” Moscow has called on Washington to stop the attacks.

On Sunday, a Houthi military spokesman claimed, without providing any evidence, that they had launched missile and drone attacks on the US aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman and other warships in the Red Sea. The strikes were in response to the US attacks.

The same day, a US official told Reuters that their aircraft had shot down 11 Houthi drones. None of the drones came close to the Harry S. Truman. The official added that their forces had identified a missile that had crashed off the Yemeni coast. They did not see it as a threat.

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures", "Whenever the Houthis say we will stop attacking your ships, we will stop shooting at their drones. When they say they will stop attacking the ships, this operation will end. But until then, the operation will continue."

Pete Hegseth said, "The issue is that we have to stop targeting our assets in vital waterways ... so that freedom of navigation can be restored, which is a vital national interest of the United States. Iran has been sponsoring the Houthis for a long time, and that has to stop."

The Houthis have been fighting an armed struggle for more than a decade. They currently control most of Yemen. Since November 2023, they have carried out more than 100 attacks targeting commercial vessels in the Red Sea. They claim that they are carrying out these attacks in solidarity with Palestinians who are victims of Israeli attacks in Gaza. The US is having to launch a costly military operation to intercept the missiles and drones fired by the Houthis. Last week, the group said it would attack Israeli ships in the Red Sea if Israel lifted its blockade on Gaza, or face a military strike.

On Saturday, Trump called on the Houthis to stop attacking ships in the Red Sea, warning them of “hell rain” if they did not. Trump threatened Tehran, saying that if Iran threatened the US, “America will hold you fully accountable. That will not be good for you.”

US government shutdown averted as Senate passes spending bill

 

Getty Images

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer voted to allow funding to the government.

The US has averted a government shutdown after the Senate passed a Republican-led measure to keep the government funded for the next six months.

The stopgap funding bill passed in the Senate 54-46, as two Democrats joined all but one Republican senator in voting yes. President Donald Trump must now sign it into law before the Friday midnight deadline.

The key vote came earlier when some Senate Democrats, after fierce debate, allowed the measure to pass a procedural hurdle.

The Senate minority leader, Democrat Chuck Schumer, and nine others broke with their colleagues to vote to advance the bill to its final Friday evening vote.

Two Democrats - Senator Jeanne Shaheen and Independent Senator Angus King of Maine - voted in favour of its final passage. Schumer voted "no".

On Thursday, he announced he would vote to allow the measure to move forward, saying although it wasn't a bill he liked, he believed triggering a shutdown would be a worse result.

• Democrat Party infighting exposes struggle to unite against Trump

Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez called Schumer's willingness to let the spending bill proceed a "huge slap in the face", adding that there is a "wide sense of betrayal" among the party, according to the BBC's US partner CBS News.

She said supporting the bill "codifies the chaos and the reckless cuts that Elon Musk has been pursuing", and that Senate Democrats who voted yes would be empowering "the robbing of our federal government in order to finance tax cuts for billionaires".

The Democrats had agonised over whether to support the measure, and eventually pushed for a 30-day continuing resolution that was unlikely to earn enough support to pass.

Senator Ted Cruz accused the Democrats of conducting "political theater" and praised the bill's passage.

"The government is funded, let's get back to work," he said in a statement.

The passage is a victory for Trump and congressional Republicans.

On Friday morning, Trump offered rare bipartisan praise of Schumer's decision to let the bill advance, writing that "a non pass would be a Country destroyer, approval will lead us to new heights".

The legislation would keep much of the federal funding levels from the Biden Administration in place, with some key changes.

It increases military spending by $6bn (£4.6bn), for items like border security, veterans healthcare, and military spending. But would cut non-defence funding by about $13bn.

Local officials in Washington DC had feared the bill would result in a $1bn cut in federal funds for the city over the next six months. However, the Senate approved a separate bill that kept its current operating budget intact, the New York Times reported.

Meta stops ex-director from promoting critical memoir

Meta has won an emergency ruling in the US to temporarily stop a former director of  Facebook from promoting or further distributing copies of her memoir.

The book, Careless People by Sarah Wynn-Williams, who used to be the company's global public policy director, includes a series of critical claims about what she witnessed during her seven years working at Facebook.

Facebook's parent company, Meta, says the ruling - which orders her to stop promotions "to the extent within her control" - affirms that "the false and defamatory book should never have been published".

The UK publisher Macmillan says it is "committed to upholding freedom of speech" and Ms Wynn-Williams' "right to tell her story".

It told the BBC that she had been due to do "extensive media" in the UK and internationally and "has been prevented from doing so".

At a hearing on Wednesday at the American Arbitration Association - a neutral third party which resolves disputes out of court - Ms Wynn-Williams was told she must refrain from engaging in or "amplifying any further disparaging, crucial or otherwise detrimental comments".

All previous disparaging comments "to the extent within her control" must also be retracted, the ruling also said.

The book is former New Zealand diplomat Ms Wynn-Williams' account of joining Facebook in 2011 and watching it grow from a "front row seat".

Her allegations include that executives had worked "hand in glove" with the Chinese government on potential ways of allowing Beijing to censor and control content in exchange for access to the lucrative market.

Meta disputes the allegations contained in the book. Regarding China, it says it is "no secret we were once interested" in operating services there. "We ultimately opted not to go through with the ideas we'd explored."

Ms Wynn-Williams has also filed a whistleblower complaint with the US markets regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), alleging Meta misled investors - which Meta also denies. The BBC has reviewed the complaint.

During the emergency hearing the arbitrator, Nicholas Gowen, found Meta had provided enough evidence that Ms Wynn-Williams had potentially violated her severance contract. She did not personally attend Thursday's hearing.

In his ruling, Mr Gowan said Meta would suffer "immediate and irreparable loss" in the absence of a temporary ruling in the case.

He did not order the book's publisher, Flatiron Books, or its parent company, Macmillan, to take any action.

The ruling will remain in effect unless it is modified or lifted following a full hearing.

Following the decision, Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said in a post on X: "This ruling affirms that Sarah Wynn-Williams' false and defamatory book should never have been published."

Careless People was released in the US, where it is number six on the Amazon chart, on Tuesday. It was published in the UK on Thursday.

In a statement, a spokeswoman for Macmillan said: "As publishers, we are committed to upholding freedom of speech and her right to tell her story. Due to legal process instituted by Meta, the author has been prevented from continuing to participate in the book's publicity."