Trade Truce: Washington and Beijing Agree on Temporary Tariff Cuts
According to a joint statement released following two days of intensive talks in Geneva on May 10–11, both sides have agreed to drastically cut tariffs for an initial period of 90 days. The announcement, first reported by CNN, signals what negotiators described as “substantial progress” in efforts to stabilize one of the world’s most consequential bilateral relationships.
Under the agreement, which takes effect on May 14, the United States will lower tariffs on Chinese goods fr om 145% to 30%, while China will reduce tariffs on American imports from 125% to 10%. The move is framed as a temporary measure, but it may pave the way for more durable détente if it holds.
Both countries underscored the need for “sustainable, long-term, and mutually beneficial economic and trade relations.” In a notable structural development, the two sides also committed to establishing a formal bilateral mechanism for ongoing economic dialogue. This body will be co-chaired by He Lifeng, Vice Premier of the State Council of China; Scott Bessent, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury; and Jamieson Greer, U.S. Trade Representative.
The forum, according to the communiqué, will rotate its meetings between China, the United States, and—by mutual agreement—a third country. It is designed to allow for working-level consultations on trade and economic matters as needed, potentially reducing the reliance on high-stakes, last-minute summits to manage tensions.
A fragile thaw
This development comes at a time when global markets are increasingly sensitive to shifts in U.S.-China relations, with lingering concerns over supply chain vulnerabilities, intellectual property rights, and geopolitical rivalry. While the Geneva deal does not address these structural issues, it is viewed by observers as a confidence-building measure—a signal that both sides remain willing to talk, and more importantly, to compromise.
Skeptics, however, warn that the 90-day timeframe is perilously short, and that the rollback of tariffs could be reversed just as swiftly if talks falter. Both governments have domestic constituencies wary of appearing soft on the other side, and economic nationalism remains a potent force in Washington and Beijing alike.
Still, in an era wh ere decoupling has become more than just rhetoric, even temporary agreements are not to be dismissed. The challenge, now, is whether this truce can be translated into a broader reset—or whether it is merely a pause in an increasingly transactional and adversarial relationship.
In global trade diplomacy, as ever, the devil will be in the implementation.
