Rizky Amelia
Washington and Beijing have published matching lists of products that could be granted lower tariffs, the first detailed follow-through on an understanding reached between Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping at their summit late last week. The two governments disclosed the items on Sunday and Monday, setting the stage for negotiations over a reciprocal reduction covering roughly $60bn in two-way trade.
Under the arrangement, each side would examine easing duties on $30bn of the other's imports. The American list identifies 77 categories of Chinese goods, while China's roster names more than 1,600 US products — a numerical imbalance that reflects the far larger volume of American exports that Chinese planners appear willing to review.
The Chinese items under consideration include microwave ovens, fish hooks, artificial flowers and weighing scales, a mix of consumer and light industrial goods that would mainly affect US retail prices if duties were trimmed. The US products flagged by Beijing are dominated by farm and food categories: poultry, dairy products, noodles, eggs, peanuts, canned tomatoes and silk, along with pure-bred breeding horses.
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the deal would open market access for roughly 30 percent of American exports to China and deliver savings to US consumers. In a statement, Greer framed the lists as part of a wider push for what he called fair, balanced and reciprocal trade, pledging that Washington would keep pressing Beijing to honour commitments on agricultural and energy purchases, pursue balanced trade in non-sensitive goods and secure access for American farmers, manufacturers, businesses and workers.
China's Ministry of Commerce confirmed the list on Monday, shortly after the White House made its announcement. The ministry said the two sides would discuss a reciprocal tariff reduction framework of "$30 billion for $30 billion, aiming to reach a consensus." It described the arrangement as a way to stabilise China-US trade, improve conditions for Chinese exports to the American market, meet domestic demand and deepen cooperation in agricultural products, energy, manufactured goods and consumer goods.
The lists represent the most tangible output so far from a summit that was long on ceremony but short on concrete breakthroughs over the many disputes dividing the world's two largest economies. Their talks, which concluded on Friday, produced few firm announcements on the range of disagreements between Washington and Beijing, spanning trade, artificial intelligence and Taiwan.
Trump and Xi have now held three in-person summits since last October, and further meetings are on the calendar. The two leaders are expected to sit down again on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Shenzhen, China, in November, and then at the Group of 20 gathering in Miami, Florida, in December — encounters that could determine whether the tariff-relief process maintains momentum or stalls.
The economic backdrop explains why both capitals are eager to show progress. Two-way trade between the United States and China totalled $495bn in 2025, a decline of 25 percent from the previous year, according to the US Trade Representative. The drop has been driven in part by the tariff regimes erected since Trump, a longstanding critic of free trade orthodoxy, returned to the White House in January last year, and by the broader push in both countries to reduce dependence on each other's supply chains.
Not everyone sees the new lists as a turning point. Deborah Elms, head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, said the announcement did not signal a major shift in the relationship. She noted that both governments have largely selected goods that do not move the needle on overall trade flows, meaning the measures may shave some prices for US consumers without producing a dramatic change in inflation figures or delivering meaningful relief to most American buyers.
Elms said the same logic applies broadly to China's list. Although it contains a wide array of agricultural products, she pointed out that many of those goods are not actually exported to China at all, or not in quantities large enough to matter. That caveat undercuts the impression of sweeping liberalisation and suggests the lists function more as diplomatic signals than as engines of near-term commercial change.
The structure of the arrangement also leaves questions unresolved. The two sides have agreed only to consider more favourable tariff treatment for the named products, not to implement cuts immediately. Actual reductions would depend on follow-up talks, and the scope of any final package could expand, shrink or be traded away against other priorities such as agricultural and energy purchase targets, technology restrictions or market-access complaints that have fuelled tensions for years.
For US farmers and food producers, the Chinese list is a reminder of how much of their export potential remains tied to political decisions in Beijing. Poultry, dairy, eggs, peanuts and canned tomatoes have all been caught up in previous rounds of retaliation, and their reappearance on a negotiating document is likely to be read as a possible opening rather than a guaranteed sale. Breeders of pure-bred horses and silk producers face similarly uncertain prospects.
For American shoppers, the Chinese goods under review — microwave ovens, artificial flowers, fish hooks and weighing scales among them — represent only a narrow slice of the thousands of products imported from China each year. Any price effects would therefore be limited, and analysts caution that retailers may not pass along savings even if duties fall.
The next test will come as negotiators translate the lists into a formal framework. With the APEC and G20 summits approaching, both governments have incentives to keep the process alive and present it as evidence that the world's most consequential trading relationship can be managed rather than merely contained. Whether that translates into durable reductions in tariffs — or another round of announcements that leaves underlying trade flows largely untouched — remains the central question hanging over the effort.
Comments (0)