A 34% tariff will be imposed on all US imports, and China has launched a series of countermeasures!

The escalation of the Sino-US trade game: the strategic logic and global impact of China's countermeasures

In April 2025, China announced a comprehensive 34% tariff on US goods imported into China, and simultaneously launched a series of precise countermeasures, marking a new stage in Sino-US trade frictions. This decision is not only a continuation of the economic struggle between the two countries, but also reflects the deep-seated contradictions of the game between major powers in the context of global reconstruction. This article will analyze from four dimensions: policy motivation, measure design, industrial chain impact and international order challenge.

1. Decision-making logic of countermeasures: rule game and strategic autonomy

The direct trigger for China's countermeasures this time was the unilateral imposition of "reciprocal tariffs" by the United States on Chinese goods, but its underlying motivation was to defend multilateral trade rules and industrial chain sovereignty. According to Article 15 of the Tariff Law of the People's Republic of China, China has the right to take countermeasures against trade practices that harm national interests. The 34% tariff range is not set randomly, but is precisely targeted at the average punitive tariff rate of US exports to China, reflecting the tactical principle of "reciprocal counterattack". At the same time, the design of the exemption transition period (April 10-May 13) not only gives companies a buffer period to adjust their supply chains, but also avoids damaging the interests of foreign-funded enterprises in China due to a sudden policy change, demonstrating policy flexibility.

In the entity list control, 16 US high-tech companies are restricted from obtaining dual-use items, which directly targets the "Achilles' heel" of the US's technological containment of China. For example, High Point Aerospace Technologies is involved in the field of aviation composite materials, and its supply chain disruption will delay the development of the US sixth-generation fighter. The 11 companies included in the unreliable entity list are all involved in data security sensitive areas, such as Skydio, which was accused of illegally obtaining Chinese geographic information data through cloud computing services. This "technology-data" dual-line counterattack highlights China's initiative in formulating digital economic rules.

2. Impact on the industrial chain: precision strikes and defensive layout

The additional tariffs apparently cover "all American goods", but the actual impact shows significant industry differences. According to the 2024 China-US trade data, agricultural products (soybeans, corn), medical devices (CT tubes, etc.), and auto parts account for more than 60% of US exports to China, and these industries are the first to bear the brunt. Taking medical CT tubes as an example, China simultaneously launched an anti-dumping investigation and assessed the competitiveness of the industry, aiming to protect the market share of local companies such as United Imaging Medical and accelerate the process of domestic substitution. The American Farmers Union has warned that the 34% tariff will reduce the profit of soybean exports to China to zero, forcing some farmers to switch to cash crops.

Rare earth control is one of China's trump cards. Medium and heavy rare earths such as samarium and gadolinium are key materials for manufacturing permanent magnet motors and laser weapons. China controls more than 90% of the world's smelting capacity. Export restrictions will not only affect the production of F-35 fighter jets in the United States, but will also impact the motor supply chain of automakers such as Tesla. This strategy of "controlling technology with resources" has forced the United States to accelerate the construction of domestic rare earth smelters, but it will be difficult to break through China's technological barriers in the short term.

III. Reconstruction of International Rules: WTO Litigation and the Dilemma of Global Governance

China has filed a lawsuit against the United States for "reciprocal tariffs" at the WTO in an attempt to gain a say in international trade rules. According to the WTO's "Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes" (DSU), unilateral tariff measures are suspected of violating the principle of most-favored-nation treatment (GATT Article 1) and tariff binding commitments (GATT Article 2). However, the WTO Appellate Body is currently still suspended due to obstruction by the United States, and the lawsuit may fall into a deadlock of "difficulty in enforcing the ruling." This reflects the crisis of failure of the multilateral trading system, and countries may be forced to turn to regional trade agreements (such as RCEP and IPEF) to seek alternatives.

The attitudes of third-party economies such as the EU and ASEAN have become key variables. After China suspended imports of US poultry products, Brazil and Thailand quickly expanded their exports to China, showing a trend of "de-Americanization" in the global supply chain. The Federation of German Industries (BDI) warned that the confrontation between China and the United States may force companies to establish two independent production systems, the "China chain" and the "US chain", and the efficiency of global division of labor will drop by 15%-20%.

4. Long-term game outlook: from "decoupling" to "rebalancing"

This confrontation indicates that the Sino-US economic relationship has entered a new normal of "competitive coexistence". The United States attempts to curb China's technological rise through the "small courtyard and high wall" strategy, while China breaks the technological blockade with "systemic countermeasures". In the short term, the two countries may form "parallel markets" in the fields of new energy, AI, semiconductors, etc.; in the medium and long term, new issues such as digital tariffs and cross-border data flow rules will become the focus of the game.

For China, countermeasures need to balance openness and security. Excessive use of trade weapons may accelerate the withdrawal of foreign capital. In 2024, 28% of US companies in China have launched the "China + 1" supply chain diversification plan. Therefore, China has simultaneously relaxed foreign investment access in the financial, medical and other fields, and hedged the risks of trade frictions through institutional opening. This "offensive and defensive" strategy may reshape the competition paradigm in the era of globalization 2.0.

Conclusion: Choices at the Crossroads of Globalization

The current round of trade confrontation between China and the United States is not only a contest between the two economies, but also a battle between multilateralism and unilateralism. China responded to the challenge with a combination of "rule-based countermeasures + autonomous strengthening of the industrial chain", which not only defended national interests but also provided a paradigm for developing countries to maintain their economic sovereignty. However, the real way out for the world economy lies in reconstructing inclusive multilateral rules, rather than falling into a vicious cycle of "harming neighbors". When the smoke of the trade war dissipates, the international community will eventually realize that healthy competition under a cooperative framework is the optimal solution for the common development of mankind.