Bloomberg reported earlier today that President Trump was likely to pull the trigger on round #2 of tariffs against $200 billion in Chinese imported goods. Duh. Surprise fail. President Trump has not bluffed on a single tariff initiative since he started executing new U.S. trade policies to reset all trade relationships.
According to Jennifer Jacobs reporting (one of the few reliable) Secretary Ross, Secretary Mnuchin and Ambassador Lighthizer met Thursday to review the current status of ongoing trade deals. This is a good nugget, because it’s likely that same meeting contained the forward instructions toward Lighthizer for the Canada discussions.
According to the report, President Trump, Ross and Lighthizer are adjusting the specifics of the $200 billion Chinese products targeted based on the two-weeks of domestic feedback they received. I would actually anticipate a combination of increased tariffs on the Round #1 sector (25% on $50 billion), and the application of new sectors within the $200 billion Round #2 target.

• Reuters Article Here
• Bloomberg Article Here
• USTR Prior Notification Here

(more…)

In case anyone was wondering, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is in Europe talking trade with the European Union.  Within the delegation of trade negotiation, the EU trade agreement is designated to Ross, while USTR Lighthizer covers Canada and Mexico and Treasury Secretary Mnuchin is holding point on China.  Secretary Ross is getting the royalty treatment in Greece today.

Meanwhile, Ambassador Robert Lighthizer is still engaged with Chrystia from Canada as negotiations continue to see if a U.S-Canada trade deal is possible.  He must have the patience of Job. The 52,000 lost Canadian jobs announced today has shifted the landscape a little.  Canada appears slightly more likely to back-away from prior demands to carve out the Canadian Dairy industry and continue the process of protectionist tariffs.
Ms. Freeland is heading back to Canada tonight, leaving her negotiation team in DC to continue working.  However, Canada still demands to exempt their “cultural industries”, telecommunications and media sectors, from any trade agreement. The issues for Canada to join the U.S-Mexico agreement are/were:

• open their telecommunications and banking sector (eliminate non tariff barriers).
• eliminate soft-wood (lumber) and aeronautics federal subsidies.
• begin a process of lowering their assembly use of Chinese/Asian goods.
• accept the rules of origin for North American manufacturing.
• eliminate protectionist tariffs on dairy and farm products.
• accept the U.S-Mexico terms for arbitration and dispute resolution.

The Telecommunications/media sector is non-negotiable according to Justin from Canada. There may be flexibility within banking (not much information).  The lumber and aeronautics subsidies could be dropped.  Rules of origin are non-negotiable for President Trump.  Protectionist tariffs on dairy and farm products are the current issue being discussed.  Dispute resolution is an outstanding issue.
(more…)

Earlier today National Economic Council Chairman Larry Kudlow appeared on CNBC for an extensive interview about the current U.S. economy. Jobs growing; wages growing; economy growing; trade deals improving…. Lots of good MAGAnomic stuff:

(Via CNBC) White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow is extremely optimistic about the U.S. economy.
“The economic boom continues,” he said on CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” Friday, citing the August jobs report and the month’s wage gain data. “It’s the big story of 2018. Jobs, growth, wages. It doesn’t get much better than that.”

(more…)

From a pure economic/financial perspective this Nike  branding campaign doesn’t make sense…. unless, you realize a much bigger picture. A hidden bigger picture.

On its face, it just seems absurd. Why would any major corporation intentionally stake out a branding position that is adverse to their financial interests?
I’ve spoken to some very excellent business actuaries on this late today; and one specific conversation finally helped to make it all make sense.  During that conversation a good ally shared: “a multinational corporation would never make a branding decision adverse to their financial interests. Unless there is a hidden risk unrelated to what is visible on the surface.” ….BINGO, there it is, the lightbulb went on.
A hidden risk that likely has nothing whatsoever to do with Colin Kaepernick.
The bigger risk to Nike has nothing to do with Black Lives Matter, U.S. Consumers, or Antifa-like political advocacy. The bigger financial risk to the Nike Corporation has everything to do with geopolitics and a reset of international trade agreements.
Here’s the hidden aspect with research to back it up.  Nike Inc. has hitched its massive corporate existence to a 10-year business plan that is dependent on the continuance of recently negotiated manufacturing contracts.
(more…)

When China announced the One-Road/One-Belt initiative (now banned from discussion in Beijing); in combination with a looming trade confrontation with President Trump; CTH pointed out that sketchy pandas’ bamboo economy was very vulnerable because it was deep, but narrow – simply too dependent on manufacturing and exports.
Slow down the manufacturing sector and, well, there is no fall-back position….. Cue:

BEIJING (Reuters) – China’s manufacturing activity grew at the slowest pace in more than a year in August, with export orders shrinking for a fifth month and employers cutting more staff, a private survey showed on Monday.
The gloomy findings reinforce views that China’s economy will cool further in coming months, even as the United States ramps up tariffs on Chinese goods. That is likely to prompt more spending and other growth boosting steps from Beijing.

(more…)

The Trump Doctrine is easiest to describe as: deploying economic leverage to achieve national security interests.  The Trump Doctrine is unique and stunningly effective.

Many of the geopolitical decisions have multiple facets which connect like small gears on a much larger machine.  One of those small dual-purpose gears is the Doctrine as it is applied to Pakistan.  The downstream moves impact China, our #1 geopolitical and economic adversary, then Russia, and also support new alliances with India and the broader Middle-east.

Toward China = ♦Squeeze #3. In 2017 Trump and Secretary Tillerson, now Secretary Pompeo, put Pakistan on notice they need to get involved in bringing their enabled tribal “extremists” (Taliban) to the table in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s primary investor and economic partner is China. The U.S. removed $900 million in financial support to pressure Pakistan toward a political solution in Afghanistan, China has to fill void.  [NOTE: Last month the World Bank began discussions about a financial bailout for Pakistan.]  Again, more one-way bleed for China. {Go Deep}

When President Trump removed the $900 million in aid to Pakistan, he empowered the Pentagon via Defense Secretary James Mattis, with an option to give $300 million to Pakistan if Mattis felt positive steps were being taken to change behavior.  Today the Pentagon announces no change in behavior is noted:
(more…)

The financial media is all a flutter based on a Bloomberg report that President Trump is likely to apply tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods.  DUH !  Why do they think U.S.T.R. Lighthizer has been conducting open section 301 tariff hearings for the past week?  Of course President Trump is considering tariffs on $200 billion in trade goods; this approach is not exactly a secret.
Then again, most of the financial media are clueless about the larger economic strategy and how China ties into the negotiations with North Korea.  I digress.

The proposed tariffs are a supplemental action in response to China’s unfair trade practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation, based on the findings in USTR’s investigation of China under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Tariffs on $34 billion in goods from China are currently in effect, and tariffs on an additional $16 billion took effect on August 23rd, 2018.
The issue is not *if* President Trump will apply the 301-tariffs, the question is *how* and *when*?
(more…)

As Foreign Minister Chrystia from Canada arrives in Washington DC to meet with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is interviewed by CNBC.
Triple Play: Finalize NAFTA (or two bilats); fill in the details on previously agreed EU deal; then face-down red dragon (China).

National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow holds an impromptu press gaggle at the White House to field questions about trade and related MAGAnomic matters.

So much good news: WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The trade deal between the United States and Mexico will stand even if Canada does not come to an agreement with the Trump administration in the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Mexico’s foreign minister said on Monday.

“If for any reason the government of Canada and the United States do not reach an agreement, we already know that there will still be a deal between Mexico and the United States.”
~ Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray (link)

Remember those “private meetings” between Jesus Seade and Robert Lighthizer?
It is said: a picture is worth a thousand words.  Cue the audio visual:

The incoming Mexican President, Andrés Manuel López Obrador,(AMLO)’s representative is Jesus Seade. The outgoing Mexican President Pena Nieto’s representative is Mexican Secretary of Economy Idelfonso Guajardo.
Why the joy in Seade and the defeated Guajardo?  The answer is in the details:
One of President Trump’s principal objectives in the renegotiation is to ensure the agreement benefits American workers.  The United States and Mexico have agreed to a Labor chapter that brings labor obligations into the core of the agreement, makes them fully enforceable, and represents the strongest provisions of any trade agreement.

Key Achievement: Worker Representation in Collective Bargaining

The Labor chapter includes an Annex on Worker Representation in Collective Bargaining in Mexico, under which Mexico commits to specific legislative actions to provide for the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining.

(more…)