Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. Here's the latest this morning,
Speaker 1: the US and China agreeing to a ninety day cooling
Speaker 1: golf period, the US reducing its levies on Chinese imports
Speaker 1: from one hundred and forty five percent to thirty while
Speaker 1: China cuts duties on US goods from one hundred and
Speaker 1: twenty five percent to ten Joining US now to discuss
Speaker 1: the Treasury Secretary Scott Benson a driving force behind trade
Speaker 1: talks in Geneva over the weekend. Mister Secretary, welcome back
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg. Survelland sir, it's good to see you.
Speaker 2: Good afternoon from Geneva, Jonathan.
Speaker 1: Greater catch up as always, sir. Let's get into these
Speaker 1: talks over the weekend. One standout line for me and
Speaker 1: for many others was the line that the differences between
Speaker 1: the two sides weren't as large as we thought they
Speaker 1: would be. What were those differences, sir, and why were
Speaker 1: they smaller than you expected?
Speaker 3: Well, I think, Jonathan, what's important to know is for
Speaker 3: the tariff program, we had a plan, we had a process.
Speaker 3: We did not have a mechanism for engaging with the Chinese.
Speaker 3: So China was the only country who escalated their terriffs
Speaker 3: in response to our reciprocal tariff level. So that resulted
Speaker 3: in an unfortunate escalation. So we now have a mechanism
Speaker 3: to deal with that. Neither side wants a generalized decoupling.
Speaker 3: The US is going to do a strategic decoupling in
Speaker 3: terms of the items that we discovered during COVID were
Speaker 3: of national security interest, whether it's semiconductor's, medicine, steel, So
Speaker 3: we still have generalized terraffs on some of those, but
Speaker 3: both sides agreed we do not want a generalized decoupling.
Speaker 1: These things tay time. As you know, sir, we've got
Speaker 1: ninety days now to work with. Last time around, it
Speaker 1: took eighteen months to reach an agreement on purchase agreements.
Speaker 1: I think you yourself has said in the past that
Speaker 1: it can take two to three years to have a
Speaker 1: full comprehensive trade agreement with the country, between the US
Speaker 1: and China. What do you think is achievable, sir, over
Speaker 1: the next ninety days.
Speaker 3: Well, Jonathan, we're going to see. But what has to
Speaker 3: happen is it has to be fair for the American people.
Speaker 3: But in January twenty twenty, President Trump produced a template
Speaker 3: we had an excellent trade agreement with China and the
Speaker 3: Biden administration chose not to enforce it. The Chinese delegation
Speaker 3: basically told us that once President Biden came into office,
Speaker 3: they just ignored their obligations. So we all already have
Speaker 3: a large framework. The other thing to remember here, Jonathan,
Speaker 3: is that this is a pause down to ten percent.
Speaker 3: The April second level for China is thirty four percent,
Speaker 3: so we will be working to see where their final
Speaker 3: reciprocal number ends up. And the negotiations are a combination
Speaker 3: of tariffs, non tariff, trade barriers, currency manipulation, and subsidies
Speaker 3: of labor and capital.
Speaker 1: Just to build on that, as I listened to you,
Speaker 1: do you consider the new levels as a ceiling or
Speaker 1: a flaw?
Speaker 2: Well, it's obvious.
Speaker 3: It's obviously a floor that they are now with everyone
Speaker 3: else who did not retaliate. So the levels have come
Speaker 3: down to the Palls level, and what I would say
Speaker 3: is thirty four which is their assigned April second level,
Speaker 3: would be a ceiling, which is what I went out
Speaker 3: and told people on April second, which.
Speaker 2: Is why I was surprised.
Speaker 3: Market participants panicked because we had kept We had kept
Speaker 3: the upside for every country and if they didn't retaliate.
Speaker 3: So this unfortunate turn of events happened because.
Speaker 2: Of retaliation, but now we have the.
Speaker 3: A process in place to avoid escalation like that.
Speaker 4: Again, Secretary Beston, just to build on that, are you
Speaker 4: saying that tariff rates will only go up from here?
Speaker 4: If this really is a floor of ten percent on
Speaker 4: the Chinese side and thirty percent on the US side.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that they're going to go up, but
Speaker 3: it would be implausible that they would go below ten.
Speaker 4: One thing that you've been talking about is generalized to
Speaker 4: coupling is something that's not necessarily in the interest of
Speaker 4: either side, and either side wants that.
Speaker 2: What about a strategic to coupling.
Speaker 4: What is the appropriate rate of tariffs that could potentially
Speaker 4: cause some sort of strategic to coupling in the sectors
Speaker 4: that you are talking about.
Speaker 2: Well, look, bringing back our strategic are important. Strategic industries
Speaker 2: can be.
Speaker 3: A result of terrorists, but it's also a result of
Speaker 3: national will. So this administration is running full speed to
Speaker 3: make sure that what we saw during COVID never happens again.
Speaker 3: So it's a combination of it can be terrorists, but again,
Speaker 3: it is the administration moving as quickly as possible to
Speaker 3: make sure that we are self sufficient in the strategic industries.
Speaker 1: I think that's completely understandable from the United States side,
Speaker 1: and I want to miss the secretary whether the Chinese
Speaker 1: understood that. Did you get the sense they do understand
Speaker 1: that that will be the road forward for the United States.
Speaker 3: Well, I think they understand that, and I think they
Speaker 3: understand that we are focused on fair trade, that this
Speaker 3: gigantic depth that we have with them, that it didn't
Speaker 3: happen last year, it didn't happen there before, It's happened
Speaker 3: over decades, and that this happened half excuse me, has
Speaker 3: to be remedied. The China shock gutted our manufacturing sector,
Speaker 3: and we want to bring that back.
Speaker 2: On the other side.
Speaker 3: Party chair she has said that he would like to
Speaker 3: increase consumption, but to date the Chinese have just increased manufacturing.
Speaker 3: So we would like to see them increase consumption. We
Speaker 3: would like to see them open their market to American products.
Speaker 3: So there are two ways to rebalance. One is fewer
Speaker 3: Chinese goods in.
Speaker 2: The US market.
Speaker 3: The other is more American goods in the Chinese market.
Speaker 3: And my guess is that the answer is somewhere in between.
Speaker 1: Some of this, of course, takes us back to the
Speaker 1: purchase agreements of the first term of the president. Is
Speaker 1: it different this time around? Is it as simple as
Speaker 1: just revisit seeing those purchase agreements or do you say
Speaker 1: additional sectors being targeted?
Speaker 3: Jonathan, I think everything's on the table. But the Phase
Speaker 3: one purchase agreements is a very good roadmap because I
Speaker 3: will point out that during twenty twenty China met their
Speaker 3: obligations under that agreement. It was only under President Biden
Speaker 3: where they neglected them. So we are getting we are
Speaker 3: starting there, and look, the world has changed. Products have changed,
Speaker 3: product mix has changed. So I think everything's on the table.
Speaker 3: But the main thing here is we have to have
Speaker 3: a fair deal for the American people. And keep in
Speaker 3: mind too that we also have twenty percent finanyl terras
Speaker 3: on so we were at th for twenty twenty five.
Speaker 3: We have put on thirty percent terras. They have put
Speaker 3: on ten. And my economic observation is that businesses just
Speaker 3: need time to calibrate. That we saw approximately twenty percent
Speaker 3: teriffs from President Trump's first term. Businesses calibrated, supply chains,
Speaker 3: moved We have seen twenty percent tariffs President Trump put
Speaker 3: on in February due to the fentanyl crisis calibration very
Speaker 3: little disruption, and now a ten percent additional tariff should
Speaker 3: mean very little disruption.
Speaker 4: Mister Secretary, A lot of people are wondering what caused
Speaker 4: the softening and tone, the reason for both sides to
Speaker 4: come together and be able to have this kind of
Speaker 4: negotiation and try to pass forward where there will be
Speaker 4: further negotiations in the near term. What's your interpretation of
Speaker 4: what caused both sides to come to the table.
Speaker 3: Well, I think that the two levels on the reciprocal tariffs,
Speaker 3: when they both ratcheted up to one twenty five, caused
Speaker 3: the equivalent of an embargo, and that wasn't good for
Speaker 3: either side. Where the depth is the country, so less
Speaker 3: bad for us. But I think there was the unintended
Speaker 3: consequence of this very fast ratchet, and so now both sides.
Speaker 2: Are at ten.
Speaker 3: We will be moving forward with a ninety day pause,
Speaker 3: and the important thing to remember is that we can
Speaker 3: always go back to the April second level. But my
Speaker 3: sense is we had very good discussions. My counterpart was
Speaker 3: the very firm but very engaged and I think we
Speaker 3: have set the stage for meaningful discussions.
Speaker 4: Mister secretary, is there already a scheduled date for Jijian
Speaker 4: Ping and President Trump to meet in person at any
Speaker 4: point in the near term? Do you think that that
Speaker 4: is something in the cards as part of these negotiations.
Speaker 3: I think that there would be a phone call before
Speaker 3: a meeting, and there's nothing on the calendar, but I
Speaker 3: could imagine that that could happen in the coming weeks
Speaker 3: or months.
Speaker 1: Coming into the meeting. As you know, the President put
Speaker 1: out a social media post he referred to as Scotty b.
Speaker 1: I won't go there, We'll keep using, mister secretary, and
Speaker 1: he said, you could go as low as eighty. Can
Speaker 1: you share with us how we went from, say, eighty
Speaker 1: down to thirty. Where did that number come from?
Speaker 2: Sir?
Speaker 3: I think that in the President's mind, eighty was a
Speaker 3: number that did not cause an embargo, so we could
Speaker 3: still be at eighty and have trade flowing. But we
Speaker 3: were able to both the moved down by one hundred
Speaker 3: and fifteen percent. And Jonathan, I think the other important
Speaker 3: thing here is I think this is the first time
Speaker 3: that the Chinese have addressed one of the President's real priority,
Speaker 3: which is ending this fentanyl crisis in the United States.
Speaker 3: So they brought their trade team and they brought a
Speaker 3: Vice Minister for State Security who met with our national
Speaker 3: security team. It was a separate meeting, and they had
Speaker 3: a very robust and detailed discussion on ways to stop
Speaker 3: the transport of precursor drugs from China to North America
Speaker 3: that ends up in the hands of the cartels that
Speaker 3: is then killing several hundred thousand Americans a year. So
Speaker 3: I'm very optimistic that President Trump we have solved part
Speaker 3: of the fentanyl crisis by securing the border, and I
Speaker 3: think this is the next step on that. So if
Speaker 3: over the coming months we were to see excellent engagement
Speaker 3: from the Chinese and solutions towards solving the fentanyl crisis,
Speaker 3: I think we could see some amount of the ventanyl
Speaker 3: tariffs perhaps come off, but that is going to take
Speaker 3: actions from them.
Speaker 1: What kind of action specifically, say, well, we can.
Speaker 3: See where these precursor drugs are coming from from.
Speaker 2: At Treasury.
Speaker 3: Financial Criminal Enforcement Network has very good visibility into international finance.
Speaker 3: We can see these Chinese companies that are selling the
Speaker 3: equipment for making the pills, that transferring the precursor drugs
Speaker 3: to the cartels.
Speaker 2: US Treasury has declared.
Speaker 3: The Mexican cartels foreign terrorist organizations, so working with Chinese
Speaker 3: leadership to stop this would be a very tangible symbol.
Speaker 3: In China, the narcotics distribution is punishable by death, and
Speaker 3: we're not pushing for that necessarily, but we are pushing
Speaker 3: for very very strict enforcement, similar to what they do
Speaker 3: at home.
Speaker 4: Mister Secretary, I imagine you're incredibly tired, and a lot
Speaker 4: of people were very excited to see you taking the
Speaker 4: lead in these discussions, certainly in the market. Are you
Speaker 4: going to be taking the lead going forward with other
Speaker 4: difficult negotiations around the world with different trading partners.
Speaker 3: I've been involved in most of the Asia negotiations. We
Speaker 3: had a very good negotiation with Or, We've had two
Speaker 3: rounds of negotiations with Japan.
Speaker 2: I've been involved with Korea.
Speaker 3: I've met with the Vietnam and excuse me, also Indonesia.
Speaker 3: So my focus has been on the Asia region thus far.
Speaker 3: And then the trade team had a great victory with
Speaker 3: the UK putting together the contours of the first trade deal.
Speaker 3: The other thing I want to say too, is my
Speaker 3: partner here in Geneva and Best.
Speaker 2: Her career was an incredible asset.
Speaker 3: He has years of experience, a broad and deep knowledge
Speaker 3: of trade, negotiation, of.
Speaker 2: The numbers and the nuance.
Speaker 3: And we would not be here today without ambassador career.
Speaker 1: Missus Secretary, just before you go, you've promised us a
Speaker 1: lot of time. We've used up most of it already.
Speaker 1: Just the final question, what does victory look like for
Speaker 1: you in six months time when we get to year end?
Speaker 1: And I know it's frustrated to you that we've only
Speaker 1: been talking about trade, that we haven't focused on the
Speaker 1: full policy platform. Where do you want to be by
Speaker 1: year end?
Speaker 3: Well, well, Johnathan, this administration is doing peace deal, trade deal,
Speaker 3: tax deal. I try to state mostly as you know
Speaker 3: in my econ lane. So from that lane, victory to
Speaker 3: me looks like the three legged stool that really are
Speaker 3: the three parts of our program.
Speaker 2: Really kicking in.
Speaker 3: So we will have most of the trade and tariffs settled.
Speaker 2: The tax bill is.
Speaker 3: Moving along very well, better than I could have imagined.
Speaker 3: Speaker Johnson, leader Thun are doing an incredible job with
Speaker 3: President Trump's leadership. So we will have tax done and
Speaker 3: then the final piece that is longer lagged, but perhaps
Speaker 3: the most important is deregulation and deregulation. We are deregulating
Speaker 3: across all industries every day. President Trump is committed to
Speaker 3: for every new regulation, ten comes off the books. And
Speaker 3: deregulations should start kicking in in the third.
Speaker 2: And the fourth quarters.
Speaker 3: So tax, trade and deregulation all coming together at the
Speaker 3: end of the year. I think it's going to be very,
Speaker 3: very powerful for President Trump's economic agenda.
Speaker 1: Mister Treasury Secretary Scope person, at your time, sir from Geneva.
Speaker 1: Very generous with your time.