Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Trump Surprises G20 With Huawei Concession: U.S. Companies Can Sell To Huawei

  1. #1

    Trump Surprises G20 With Huawei Concession: U.S. Companies Can Sell To Huawei

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidph.../#118f75731e21

    Earlier today in a press conference after the G20 meeting in Tokyo, President Trump revealed an updated stance on Huawei. While it’s not a lifting of the blanket ban, it will significantly benefit the Chinese manufacturer.

    As part of the continuing trade negotiations, the issue of Huawei would be saved until the end of the trade talks, with President Trump saying, We’ll have to save that to the very end, we’ll have to see.”

    In other words, the question of lifting the ban on Huawei selling its products, which include smartphones, laptops and communications infrastructure technologies, to the U.S. has not been changed.

    The more interesting element was the next comment from the President.

    One of the things I will allow, however, is, a lot of people are surprised we send and we sell to Huawei a tremendous amount of product that goes into the various things that they make. And I said that that’s okay, that we will keep selling that product. These are American companies… that make product and that’s very complex, by the way, and highly scientific. And in some cases we’re the ones that do it, we’re the only ones that do it. What we’ve done in Silicon Valley is incredible, actually and nobody has been able to compete with it, and I’ve agreed and pretty easily, I’ve agreed to allow them to continue to sell that product. So American companies will continue and they were having a problem, the companies were not exactly happy that they couldn’t sell because they had nothing to do with whatever it was potentially happening with respect to Huawei, so I did do that.
    You could almost hear the sighs of relief wafting across the oceans from the “incredible” Silicon Valley. It means that hardware components from companies such as Intel and Micron can know that they can continue to sell to Huawei.
    He also agreed (for now) to put off any new sanctions against China- existing sanctions will remain in place.
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 06-29-2019 at 12:18 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Micron's YoY revenue was down 40% in its recent quarterly report. Stock was too.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  4. #3
    Reuters: White House official: New sales to China's Huawei to cover only widely available goods. (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's decision to allow expanded sales of U.S. technology supplies to Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei will only apply to products widely available around the world, and leave the most sensitive equipment off limits, a top White House aide said on Sunday. "All that is going to happen is Commerce will grant some additional licenses where there is a general availability" of the parts the company needs, National Economic Council chairman Larry Kudlow said on "Fox News Sunday."
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1TV0PO

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Perhaps by training, by habit or by unintended consequence, the DC proletariat have developed a system for themselves where the process itself as the end result. This allows them to wax philosophically about problems; but it is within the discussion of the problem itself where their industry exists. Solutions are not wanted because that stops the process.
    DC journalism has evolved into reveling about the never ending process and, as a consequence, media completely ignore the end point, miss the bottom line, don’t actually SEE the subject matter, and never actually attempt to discover solutions.
    If you watch this nonsense long enough you realize those inside the industrial media complex avoid the subject matter deliberately; because if they get their heads around it and nail it home, they won’t have anything to talk about – they will have exhausted their stash.
    As part of their unspoken strategy when they encounter a solution driven approach, the media (writ large) fall back on the Gruber Principle: relying on “the stupidity of the American voter” not to understand how the lies and talking points are being distributed.
    Today’s example surrounds President Trump and the ongoing negotiations with China. Into this dynamic Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd surfaces as an entity on the U.S. Commerce Dept. restricted “Entity List” on May 16, 2019.
    On May 20th, 2019, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross announced the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, would be issuing Temporary General License (TGL) permits for U.S. business interests who wish to engage in commercial exchanges with Huawei.
    The Commerce Department reviews each request, outlines what products can be exchanged, and restricts the company to a transaction of product approved by the license. Each license lasts 90-days.
    “The Temporary General License grants operators time to make other arrangements and the Department space to determine the appropriate long term measures for Americans and foreign telecommunications providers that currently rely on Huawei equipment for critical services,” said Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross. “In short, this license will allow operations to continue for existing Huawei mobile phone users and rural broadband networks.” (link)
    Additionally, with the exception of the transactions explicitly authorized by the Temporary General License, any exports, reexports, or in country transfers of items subject to the Export Administration Regulation (EAR) will continue to require a special license granted after a review by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) under a presumption of denial.
    Under the new regulations any company wishing to engage in a commercial transaction with Huawei has to apply and gain pre-approval from the U.S. Commerce Department. Hence, the issuance of a 90-day license. Any product or service not approved by the license is not allowed to be exchanged.
    This process began on May 20th and still exists today. This process is what President Trump was referencing when he announced the U.S. and China would restart trade negotiations as it related to Huawei. Specifically when the president said: “Ross will evaluate each request”.
    Nothing can be purchased from, or sold to, Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd and/or its sixty-eight non-U.S. affiliates, without getting permission from the U.S. commerce department. Nothing in the agreement between President Trump and Chinese Chairman Xi Jinping changes that process.





    If Beijing was not going to accept the closed chapters of the prior negotiation; a position they previously rebuked; then there would be no starting point between the Chinese and U.S. teams. We don’t like to make too many assumptions, but common sense would indicate the agreements between all parties, prior to the collapse, is now the agreed starting point.
    If accurate (obviously details to be identified later) this would indicate that the hawks in Beijing, those who formerly balked, have now retreated from their antagonistic position toward the agreement negotiated by Liu He.
    It is likely they saw growing ramifications and consequences over the past 30+ days. In essence, after getting a taste of what was coming, Beijing saw a cycle of continual collapse as their future; they had no option but to try and stop the downward spiral.
    This internal outlook, overlaying their historic zero-sum perspective, would make sense given the latest developments; party because the reality of an increasingly losing position was their new baseline. A cessation of further damage was their best scenario.
    Summary: Trump forced Beijing to see less-loss as the better loss.
    However, as noted in the attitude of President Trump, he retains the larger tariff level despite China’s re-engagement. Trump has allowed the restart itself to be the face-saving Xi needed, yet he retains the prior tariff gains. Team Trump yielded nothing back.
    Do not take this dynamic lightly. China has never negotiated for, nor accepted, less-loss before. Understanding this is new ground for them we can only imagine the anxiety within internal discussions. Vice-Premier Liu He cannot turn to the Beijing Hawks and say: ‘I told you so’. He can only start again and hope the same outcome does not repeat.
    Both teams know the prior closed chapters were negotiated in good faith by Liu He, Robert Lightizer and Mnuchin. It wasn’t the U.S. who walked away from prior commitments. Therefore it makes additional sense for Chairman Xi to offer the Ag purchases as a show of good faith; and, in turn, President Trump gives the optics of compromise on high-tech.
    Returning to the original point of collapse, the stickler point was/is the enforcement mechanism if China cheats. This is where Lighthizer had built sector-by-sector, product-by-product, escalating and countervailing tariffs into the compliance chapters.
    Unlike traditional trade agreements with one enforcement chapter that encompasses all of the sectors within the aggregate agreement, Bob Lighthizer built specific enforcement mechanisms into each sector. Essentially, each product had it’s own compliance requirements unique to the sector of trade.
    That multi-layered compliance is where China recoiled because they saw the U.S. as having ultimate decision-making about whether the rules were being followed. However, that construct was/is the unidirectional price Lighthizer was applying due to the history of Chinese duplicity and cheating.
    Any U.S. company (or U.S. entity) harmed by Chinese trade practices (ie. ‘cheating‘, ‘theft’, ‘coercion’, etc.) would have a set of enforcement provisions to protect their interests specific to their unique sector inside the agreement. The scale of this approach is rather overwhelming to consider; however, as Lighthizer told congress this is the only way to insure compliance and protect very diverse U.S. trade interests.
    You have to write the agreement while predicting the other party will attempt to lie, cheat and steal; and they will do so with the sanctioning of the communist government.
    Lost in all of the discussions by western media is the fact that no-one has ever attempted to structure a comprehensive and enforceable trade agreement with China before. What the U.S. team is attempting will be the road-map for all other nations who will likely write similar agreements of their own.
    Writing a trade agreement between a free-market (USA) and a controlled-market (China) is where the challenge lies. One of the inherent issues will always be how the free-market system can hold the controlled-market system accountable if they cheat.
    Given the controlled-market’s governmental support for the cheaters, the accountability will naturally have to come from outside the system. It remains to be seen if it can be done.
    Arguably President Trump has a disposition that he doesn’t see how a deal is possible. However, Trump is willing to allow Lighthizer, who really is brilliant (along with Secretary Mnuchin and Secretary Ross), plenty of space to approach this problem with unique solutions.
    As President Trump just said: “The quality of the transaction is far more important to me than speed. I am in no hurry.”
    The tariffs will continue until behavior improves.

    More at: https://theconservativetreehouse.com...awei-position/
    ...
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  6. #5
    Trump "saving" part of the jobs he took away.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Trump "saving" part of the jobs he took away.
    LOL

    Casualties happen in war but it is much worse if you don't fight back.

    China has destroyed millions of jobs and was well on the way to destroying millions more if DJTvsg hadn't stood up for Americans.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  8. #7
    A senior U.S. official told the Commerce Department’s enforcement staff this week that China’s Huawei should still be treated as blacklisted, days after U.S. President Donald Trump sowed confusion with a vow to ease a ban on sales to the firm.

    More at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKCN1TY07N
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    China has destroyed millions of jobs and was well on the way to destroying millions more if DJTvsg hadn't stood up for Americans.
    Can you elaborate on this please?

    I ask because I saw you use the phrase the other day regarding China "dumping goods into the US, killing the markets". I'm paraphrasing, but the term "dumping" is verbatim. I'm familiar with the practice of predatory pricing and it's applications, but China is in no way guilty of that. So what do you mean when you say China is dumping goods into our market and killing millions of jobs?

    I'm asking because if I'm right in how I think you mean it, you're saying they flooded our market with more affordable options that US manufacturers couldn't match and that's somehow unfair. If some offbrand sneaker starts selling their shoes to as many people as they can, are they acting malicious towards Nike?

    Understand....I'm not trying to dog on you or anything, but you seem to have to key misconceptions about the import/export world, the manufacturing world, and how those two to apply to what becomes marketing strategy within the retail world. A company based in the northern US could use your claim against a competing company based in the southern US (where cost of living, hence labor costs are cheaper) because they couldn't compete with them. Or a company based in a heavily unionized state could complain about a competitor in a right to work state.

    Unless you support things like price controls and mandates on what things have to be sold for? Which would be the only way to get close to the "fairness" you seem to want. Still...even that wouldn't help in the long run though, because we're back to the fact Americans want things for as cheap as they can....and that applies to workers as well. 75% of all those lost manufacturing jobs fell to automation, not another entity. Why pay the ungodly costs it takes for an employee after you factor in his wages, training, work time lost due to breaks and vaca and sickness, and all the little tax load he brings for things like insurance........when you can simply have a bot installed that is running in the black inside of 6 months? If you're job has repetitive tasks or basic analytics....I could plant a FANUC bot there tomorrow and you'd be out of work.

    I'm not saying you can't support whatever you want to support. But I am saying that the reasons you're saying you support them are simply untrue.
    "Self conquest is the greatest of all victories." - Plato



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    .

    I would like to understand how trade if free and voluntary when you are trading with prisoner labor. The managers of Chinese companies have military ranks.

    How is the Chinese government / military a free or voluntary institution?

    I like free markets. However, trade with a non-private sector entity is not free and it is a market aberration.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by f32 View Post
    .

    I would like to understand how trade if free and voluntary when you are trading with prisoner labor. The managers of Chinese companies have military ranks.

    How is the Chinese government / military a free or voluntary institution?

    I like free markets. However, trade with a non-private sector entity is not free and it is a market aberration.
    First off.....do know how many American prisoners in private prisons work for .20 cents an hour performing some form of labor or assembly that the prison insourced? It's a lot. Not defending it.....but the point you're making isn't so cut and dried. Secondly, lol...no, the managers of Chinese companies do not have military ranks. Thirdly, the prisons independently advertise themselves to companies looking for a contract....just like our private prisons do. While the Chinese government (and most of it's people) support them working, any contracts are between the prison officials and the companies. And lastly, it's honestly something of a recent phenomenon due to them needing cheap labor since their middle class has grown so much over the past couple of decades.
    "Self conquest is the greatest of all victories." - Plato

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Intoxiklown View Post
    Can you elaborate on this please?

    I ask because I saw you use the phrase the other day regarding China "dumping goods into the US, killing the markets". I'm paraphrasing, but the term "dumping" is verbatim. I'm familiar with the practice of predatory pricing and it's applications, but China is in no way guilty of that. So what do you mean when you say China is dumping goods into our market and killing millions of jobs?

    I'm asking because if I'm right in how I think you mean it, you're saying they flooded our market with more affordable options that US manufacturers couldn't match and that's somehow unfair. If some offbrand sneaker starts selling their shoes to as many people as they can, are they acting malicious towards Nike?

    Understand....I'm not trying to dog on you or anything, but you seem to have to key misconceptions about the import/export world, the manufacturing world, and how those two to apply to what becomes marketing strategy within the retail world. A company based in the northern US could use your claim against a competing company based in the southern US (where cost of living, hence labor costs are cheaper) because they couldn't compete with them. Or a company based in a heavily unionized state could complain about a competitor in a right to work state.

    Unless you support things like price controls and mandates on what things have to be sold for? Which would be the only way to get close to the "fairness" you seem to want. Still...even that wouldn't help in the long run though, because we're back to the fact Americans want things for as cheap as they can....and that applies to workers as well. 75% of all those lost manufacturing jobs fell to automation, not another entity. Why pay the ungodly costs it takes for an employee after you factor in his wages, training, work time lost due to breaks and vaca and sickness, and all the little tax load he brings for things like insurance........when you can simply have a bot installed that is running in the black inside of 6 months? If you're job has repetitive tasks or basic analytics....I could plant a FANUC bot there tomorrow and you'd be out of work.

    I'm not saying you can't support whatever you want to support. But I am saying that the reasons you're saying you support them are simply untrue.
    ^^^THIS^^^
    There is no spoon.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Intoxiklown View Post
    Can you elaborate on this please?

    I ask because I saw you use the phrase the other day regarding China "dumping goods into the US, killing the markets". I'm paraphrasing, but the term "dumping" is verbatim. I'm familiar with the practice of predatory pricing and it's applications, but China is in no way guilty of that. So what do you mean when you say China is dumping goods into our market and killing millions of jobs?

    I'm asking because if I'm right in how I think you mean it, you're saying they flooded our market with more affordable options that US manufacturers couldn't match and that's somehow unfair. If some offbrand sneaker starts selling their shoes to as many people as they can, are they acting malicious towards Nike?

    Understand....I'm not trying to dog on you or anything, but you seem to have to key misconceptions about the import/export world, the manufacturing world, and how those two to apply to what becomes marketing strategy within the retail world. A company based in the northern US could use your claim against a competing company based in the southern US (where cost of living, hence labor costs are cheaper) because they couldn't compete with them. Or a company based in a heavily unionized state could complain about a competitor in a right to work state.

    Unless you support things like price controls and mandates on what things have to be sold for? Which would be the only way to get close to the "fairness" you seem to want. Still...even that wouldn't help in the long run though, because we're back to the fact Americans want things for as cheap as they can....and that applies to workers as well. 75% of all those lost manufacturing jobs fell to automation, not another entity. Why pay the ungodly costs it takes for an employee after you factor in his wages, training, work time lost due to breaks and vaca and sickness, and all the little tax load he brings for things like insurance........when you can simply have a bot installed that is running in the black inside of 6 months? If you're job has repetitive tasks or basic analytics....I could plant a FANUC bot there tomorrow and you'd be out of work.

    I'm not saying you can't support whatever you want to support. But I am saying that the reasons you're saying you support them are simply untrue.
    They subsidize their exports and deny our industries access to their market, both are government interference designed to advantage their companies and damage ours.
    I support canceling out their government intervention in the market or negotiating for them to stop.
    I also support strategic tariffs to preserve industries vital to our independence and liberty.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



Similar Threads

  1. U.S. won't partner with countries that use Huawei systems: Pompeo
    By Swordsmyth in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 07-06-2019, 06:38 PM
  2. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-27-2019, 04:58 PM
  3. How The Clintons Made Money From Huawei
    By Swordsmyth in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-09-2019, 02:47 AM
  4. US Pursuing Criminal Investigation Of Huawei
    By Swordsmyth in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-16-2019, 06:24 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-07-2018, 09:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •