Tariff threat too steep: Trump concedes 100 percent China duties won’t last

17 October 2025

A drone view shows a container ship at a port in Zhoushan, Zhejiang province, China October 10, 2025. cnsphoto via REUTERS

In a rare pivot of tone in Washington’s escalating trade standoff with Beijing, President Donald Trump publicly admitted on October 17 that the idea of imposing 100 percent tariffs on Chinese goods would be “not sustainable,” even as he defended the principle behind the threat. The admission follows days of pressure and market jitters over his administration’s proposed retaliation for China’s tightening export controls on rare earth minerals controls that threaten U.S. access to key inputs in semiconductors, batteries, and clean energy technology.

Trump framed the extreme tariff blueprint as a response to aggressive moves by China, saying it was prompted by what he called unfair economic practices and supply chain leverage. But by signaling that 100 percent is not viable long term, he is recalibrating the rhetoric in a way that suggests Washington may be seeking a more measured path forward. Markets reacted positively: U.S. equities rallied after the remark, suggesting investors interpreted it as a tactical de‐escalation more than a retreat.

The turnabout comes amid an intensifying drama in U.S.-China economic relations. Earlier this month Trump had announced plans for sweeping 100 percent tariffs starting November 1, citing China’s expanded export constraints on rare earths and software controls. In parallel, Chinese authorities introduced export curbs and stricter licensing regimes for materials critical to U.S. high technology industries, escalating the tension.

Those simultaneous maneuvers placed the Trump administration in a delicate position. On one side lies the need to respond firmly and credibly to economic coercion. On the other lies the danger that extreme tariffs could backfire, raising costs for American consumers, stoking inflation, and driving supply chain disruptions. Trump’s acknowledgment that 100 percent “does not have to happen,” as echoed by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in earlier remarks, underscores the risks embedded in such sweeping escalation.

Still, Trump reaffirmed his intent to meet President Xi Jinping, aiming to salvage some space for negotiation. That planned meeting, scheduled on the sidelines of upcoming international summits, is now charged with even greater symbolic weight: could it herald a return to diplomacy, or just a pause in hostilities?

Beijing, meanwhile, has responded to Trump’s softening with a mix of defiance and restraint. Chinese officials have publicly labeled U.S. tariff threats as destabilizing and inconsistent with World Trade Organization norms, while suggesting they remain open to talks. Some Chinese exporters, however, already appear to be stepping back from the U.S. market altogether, citing the uncertainty and risk of dramatic duty spikes.

Reuters

Analysts warn that the to-and-fro over tariffs and export controls could make the U.S.-China relationship a long-term saga of creeping decoupling rather than one sharp break. The WTO has also chimed in, calling for both sides to de-escalate before the trade conflict sinks into structural harm for global growth.

For now, Trump’s admission of unsustainability signals a tactical recalibration but not a retreat. The rhetoric remains firm, the path forward remains fraught, and the shadow of 100 percent tariffs still looms over supply chains, corporate strategies, and global markets.