Affichage des articles dont le libellé est state subsidies. Afficher tous les articles
Affichage des articles dont le libellé est state subsidies. Afficher tous les articles

mercredi 25 septembre 2019

Chinazism

President Trump's China criticism turns harsh at U.N., says won't take 'bad deal'
By Jeff Mason and David Lawder



UNITED NATIONS -- U.S. President Donald Trump delivered a stinging rebuke to China's trade practices on Tuesday at the United Nations General Assembly, saying he would not accept a "bad deal" in U.S.-China trade negotiations.
Four days after deputy U.S. and Chinese negotiators held inconclusive talks in Washington, Trump's remarks were anything but conciliatory and emphasized the need to correct structural economic abuses at the heart of the countries' nearly 15-month trade war.
He said Beijing had failed to keep promises it made when China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001 and was engaging in predatory practices that had cost millions of jobs in the United States and other countries.
"Not only has China declined to adopt promised reforms, it has embraced an economic model dependent on massive market barriers, heavy state subsidies, currency manipulation, product dumping, forced technology transfers and the theft of intellectual property and also trade secrets on a grand scale," President Trump said.
"As far as America is concerned, those days are over."
Although President Trump held out hope that the United States and China could still reach a trade deal, he made clear he wanted a deal that would rebalance the relationship between the two economic superpowers.
"The American people are absolutely committed to restoring balance in our relationship with China. Hopefully, we can reach an agreement that will be beneficial for both countries," President Trump said. 
"As I have made very clear, I will not accept a bad deal."
President Trump also recently said he was not interested in a "partial deal" to ease tensions with China, saying that he would hold out for a "complete deal."
U.S. stocks gave up modest gains and fell into negative territory after President Trump's U.N. address. 
President Trump's speech highlighted the plight of U.S. memory chip maker Micron Technology, which has become a symbol of U.S. assertions that China fails to protect American intellectual property and steals it or forces the transfer of it. 
Two years ago Micron accused a Chinese state firm of stealing its chip designs.
"Soon, the Chinese company obtains patents for nearly an identical product, and Micron was banned from selling its own goods in China," Trump said, "But we are seeking justice."
He added that the United States lost 60,000 factories and 4.2 million manufacturing jobs since China joined the World Trade Organization.
"The rhetoric around China and President Trump's speech was as harsh as we have heard," said Art Hogan, chief market strategist at brokerage National Securities Corp in New York.
The tone of President Trump's speech was at odds with some recent steps by China to meet his request for purchases of more American farm products. 
On Monday, Chinese importers bought about 10 shiploads of U.S. soybeans -- about 600,000 tonnes.
China's customs commission will exclude certain amounts of U.S. soybeans, pork and other products from its retaliatory tariffs, the official Xinhua news agency said on Tuesday.
The purchases were made following last week's trade talks, which both the U.S. and Chinese sides characterized as "productive." 
People familiar with the trade talks said no new Chinese proposals were presented, and the countries agreed to continue minister-level talks in early October.
In his U.N. speech, President Trump also drew a link between resolving the U.S.-China trade dispute and Beijing's treatment of Hong Kong. 
Washington was "carefully monitoring the situation in Hong Kong," he said.
"The world fully expects that the Chinese government will honor its binding treaty made with the British and registered with the United Nations, in which China commits to protect Hong Kong’s freedom, legal system and democratic ways of life," President Trump said. 
Hong Kong was a British colony until 1997.
"How China chooses to handle the situation will say a great deal about its role in the world in the future. We are all counting on Xi as a great leader," Trump added.
President Trump also touched on trade with Japan in his speech, saying that he and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Wednesday would "continue our progress in finalizing a terrific new trade deal."
It remains unclear whether the two countries will sign the deal at their bilateral meeting or whether Japanese requests for assurances that Trump won't hit them with autos tariffs will delay the final agreement.

jeudi 10 janvier 2019

Chinese Peril

Chinese-made Metro car could spy on us
By Robert McCartney and Faiz Siddiqui

Metro tests out its 7000-series subway cars in 2014 at the Shady Grove station in Maryland. 

The warnings sound like the plot of a Hollywood spy thriller: The Chinese hide malware in a Metro rail car’s security camera system that allows surveillance of Pentagon or White House officials as they ride the Blue Line — sending images back to Beijing.
And sensors on the train secretly record the officials’ conversations. 
Or a flaw in the software that controls the train — inserted during the manufacturing process — allows it to be hacked by Chinese agents and terrorists to cause a crash.
Congress, the Pentagon and industry experts have taken the warnings seriously, and now Metro will do the same. 
The transit agency recently decided to add cybersecurity safeguards to specifications for a contract it will award later this year for its next-generation rail cars following warnings that China’s state-owned rail car manufacturer could win the deal by undercutting other bidders.
Metro’s move to modify its bid specifications after they had been issued comes amid China’s push to dominate the multibillion-dollar U.S. transit rail car market. 
The state-owned China Railway Rolling Stock Corp., or CRRC, has used bargain prices to win four of five large U.S. transit rail car contracts awarded since 2014. 
The company is expected to be a strong contender for a Metro contract likely to exceed $1 billion for between 256 and 800 of the agency’s newest series of rail cars.
CRRC’s success has raised concerns about national security and China’s growing footprint in the U.S. industrial supply chain and infrastructure.
“This is part of a larger conversation about this country and China, and domination of industries,” said Robert J. Puentes, president of the Eno Center for Transportation. 
“We don’t want to get trapped into a xenophobic conversation . . . but we also don’t want to be naive.”
No U.S. company makes subway cars, so China competes in that market against companies from Asia, Europe and Canada. 
But U.S. companies build freight rail cars, such as boxcars and tank cars, and they fear China will target them next.
That could cost U.S. manufacturing jobs. 
It also could increase the risk of a cyberattack that cripples domestic rail transportation in a military confrontation or other national emergency.
“China’s attack on our rail system is insidious and ingenious,” retired Army Brig. Gen. John Adams wrote in an October report distributed by the Rail Security Alliance, a U.S. industry group. “We must retain the know-how and technology to . . . safeguard against disruption of this strategically vital sector of our economy.”
China makes no secret of its desire to dominate the global rail car industry. 
Its “Made in China 2025” economic strategy proposes to seek competitive advantage in that sector, among others.
Both the U.S. Senate and House have sought to block further Chinese penetration of the transit vehicle market. 
Each chamber has inserted language in annual transportation appropriations bills to impose a one-year ban on new purchases of mass transit rail cars or buses from Chinese-owned companies if the procurement uses federal funding. 
The ban is not yet law, as final action has been put off until this year.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) sponsored the Senate ban. 
His spokeswoman said it reflected his “concern over China’s market distorting practices and their whole government effort to dominate industries sensitive to our national security.” 
Texas is home to Trinity Industries, a leading U.S. rail car company.
A ban on purchases from China could penalize financially pressed transit systems such as Metro, which may want to take advantage of CRRC’s low prices. 
The Chinese company is able to underbid competitors because of state subsidies
CRRC did not respond to emails requesting comment.
Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.) said Metro should be willing to pay extra if necessary.
“Saving a buck isn’t worth compromising security in the nation’s capital,” Connolly said. 
“If there are valid security concerns about sourcing rail cars from a Chinese state-owned company, then find another option.”

New requirement
In picking the winner of the contract, Metro is legally required to follow guidelines it set in a lengthy request for proposals, or RFP, which it issued in September and will now revise to include the cybersecurity safeguards. 
The changes are expected to require the winning bidder get its hardware and software certified as safe by a third-party vendor cleared by the federal government.
“We are working on amended language right now that will require certain security assurances,” said Kyle Malo, Metro’s chief information security officer. 
He declined to single out China as a threat but noted, “There are countries that are far more aggressive with cyberattacks than others.”
Bids for the Metro contract are due April 4. 
The original deadline, in late January, was extended because Metro received more than 300 questions from potential bidders.
Metro decided to revise the RFP after questions were raised by board member David Horner, who represents the federal government and is a former U.S. deputy assistant secretary of transportation.
“My concern is that state-sponsored enterprises can serve as platforms for conducting cyberespionage against the United States,” Horner said. 
“These risks are today not widely understood, but their significance is becoming apparent very quickly.”
Horner’s concerns were reinforced in a Nov. 16 online article by Andrew Grotto, a former senior director for cybersecurity policy on the National Security Council. 
It warned that Metro’s RFP did not allow the transit agency to reject a bid because of cybersecurity worries.
“The risk of espionage is uniquely high in our nation’s capital,” Grotto, now a fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, said in an email. 
“Malware could divert data collected from the high definition security cameras. An adversary with that data could then use facial recognition algorithms to track riders, potentially right down to the commuting patterns of individual riders.”
The Pentagon also is concerned China could use infrastructure such as rail cars for spying. 
It pointed to recent U.S. charges of the massive, Beijing-backed hacking of business secrets as evidence of the country’s bad practices.
“As illustrated by the Dec. 20 Department of Justice indictment against the Chinese Ministry of State Security, the Chinese Communist Party’s use of predatory economic practices like illegal state-sponsored cybertheft reinforce concerns about Chinese companies playing a role in critical infrastructure — whether it be rail cars or 5G telecommunications networks,” said Air Force Lt. Col. Mike Andrews, a Defense Department spokesman.
China has previously been accused of embedding spying technology in its products. 
In May, the Pentagon directed service members on military bases to stop using phones made by the Chinese companies ZTE and Huawei because of security risks. 
In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security found that Chinese made security cameras had a “back door” loophole that left them vulnerable to hackers. 
The Wall Street Journal reported that that Chinese company’s cameras have been used at a U.S. Army base in Missouri and the U.S. embassy in Afghanistan.

City contracts
CRRC’s first big success in the U.S. subway market came in 2014, when it won a contract to build rail cars for the Boston transit authority. 
In 2016, it landed deals with systems in Chicago, Los Angeles and Philadelphia.
Agencies said CRRC had the most competitive bids — sometimes besting competitors by hundreds of millions of dollars. 
Since then, officials in some cities have complained their rail car costs may rise because of a 25 percent tariff on Chinese-made rail car components imposed by the Trump administration as part of its trade conflict with Beijing. 
Such tariffs could be removed if current U.S.-Chinese trade talks are successful.
The four transit systems said they have taken significant steps to ensure their rail cars are not outfitted with spyware or other suspicious technology. 
Critics questioned whether the safeguards were adequate.
Brian Steele, a spokesman for the Chicago Transit Authority, said the agency received bids from CRRC and Canada-based Bombardier for the construction of 846 rail cars in 2016, along with a $40 million final-assembly facility in Chicago creating 170 jobs.
“The biggest difference in the two proposals was cost,” Steele said. 
He said CRRC’s $1.3 billion bid was $226 million lower than Bombardier’s offer, a difference equivalent to 146 more rail cars.
Steele said none of the rail cars’ computer or software components will be made by a Chinese firm. He said U.S. and Canadian companies are supplying the car’s Ethernet and router components, while the “automatic train control” system will be supplied by a Pennsylvania firm.
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority has awarded more than $840 million for the construction of 404 new subway cars at CRRC’s manufacturing plant in Springfield, Mass. 
That plant, a $95 million facility, comes with 150 jobs, according to media reports. 
CRRC won the initial award with a $567 million bid, which was $154 million lower than the nearest competitor, according to an Eno report.
An MBTA spokesman said none of the new vehicles’ software components are being produced in China.
“The MBTA has robust controls in place to maintain the security of the system,” spokesman Joe Pesaturo said in an email.
Pesaturo said MBTA’s design process for new rail cars includes a cybersecurity analysis based on a U.S. Department of Defense military system safety standard.
Grotto, the former National Security Council official, said the security measures described by the transit agencies were “appropriate” but expressed concern about how they would be implemented.
“Who is responsible and held accountable for seeing these results through? How will monitoring and auditing work?” Grotto said.
Erik Olson, vice president of the Rail Security Alliance, called the assurances “overly simplistic and naive.”
“Do we really want our municipal transit agencies to take these kinds of cyber-risks, knowing that China has deployed some of the most advanced facial recognition technology, has been responsible for hacks into our critical infrastructure, and has laid out a plan to decimate many of our industries by 2025?” Olson said in an email.

mardi 5 juin 2018

How China Skirts America’s Antidumping Tariffs on Steel

Government-backed manufacturers have avoided steep U.S. and EU levies by shutting production at home and expanding overseas
By Matthew Dalton in Smederevo, Serbia, and Lingling Wei in Beijing

A steel mill outside Smederevo, Serbia, that was bought and revived by Hesteel Group, a Chinese state-owned steelmaker. 

Three years ago, the steel mill outside the small city of Smederevo, Serbia, appeared headed for the scrap heap.
The Serbian government, which owned the mill, had stopped subsidizing it after six straight years of losses. 
Hemorrhaging cash, it struggled to buy spare parts and raw materials such as iron ore.
“It was like trying to drive a car without tires,” says Siniša Prelić, a union leader at the factory.
Now production is hitting all-time highs under its new owner, Hesteel Group, a Chinese state-owned steel producer. 
Exports from the plant, which is backed by tens of millions of dollars from Chinese state banks and investment funds, are surging. 
And it has started shipping steel to the U.S.
As the Trump administration ramps up its fight against Chinese steel and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross ended trade talks with Beijing over the weekend without a settlement, U.S. officials are confronting a strategic shift from China’s state-backed manufacturers. 
For the past several years, they have been shutting production at home and expanding overseas, fueled by tens of billions of dollars from Chinese state-owned lenders and funds.

Global Expansion
Chinese steelmakers have been buying and building plants overseas, fueled by tens of billions of dollars from Chinese state-owned lenders and funds.
By owning production abroad, Chinese steelmakers aim to gain largely unfettered access to global markets. 
Their factories back in China are constrained by steep tariffs imposed by the U.S. and numerous other countries—largely before President Donald Trump took office—to stop Chinese steelmakers from dumping excess production onto world markets. 
But their factories outside China face few so-called antidumping tariffs.
The Trump administration in March jolted the global trading system by imposing additional tariffs of 25% on all imported steel and 10% on aluminum, a move aimed at ratcheting up pressure on China to shut domestic steel and aluminum plants. (Last week, those tariffs were extended to Canada, Mexico and the European Union.) 
The EU is considering its own tariffs to stop metals exports blocked by the U.S. tariffs from flooding into Europe.
Even though the new U.S. tariffs apply to Chinese steelmakers that moved production abroad, the moves are still paying off. 
The Trump tariff rate is much lower than existing U.S. antidumping tariffs on steel produced inside China, which often exceeded 200%.
A spokesman for Hesteel declined to comment. 
China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, which oversees the steel and aluminum industries, didn’t respond to inquiries.
Chinese overcapacity has depressed global steel prices and wreaked havoc on China’s competitors. After cajoling Beijing to cut domestic capacity, Western officials have watched with exasperation as Chinese companies boost production around the world. 
And Western industry executives worry the overseas investments are helping Chinese steelmakers avoid the antidumping tariffs that governments have imposed to protect their companies against unfair Chinese trade practices.

Chinese steel production rose sevenfold between 2000 and 2013. A worker helps load steel rods at a plant in Hebei province. 

China’s steel-production boom took off around the turn of the century as Beijing threw its support behind a sector seen as vital to the nation’s emergence as a global economic power. 
The 2008 financial crisis prompted Beijing to undertake an economic stimulus program that included the construction of hundreds of new steel plants. 
Chinese steel production rose sevenfold between 2000 and 2013, when it accounted for half of all global capacity.
By 2013, China’s domestic economy was slowing, leading Chinese steel and aluminum producers to flood global markets and drive down prices. 
The average price of Chinese steel exports fell by about 50% between 2011 and 2016.
Governments around the world responded by imposing more than 130 antidumping tariffs against Chinese metals manufacturers, mostly on steel, depriving the domestic market of an important outlet.
Beijing responded by ordering capacity cuts: a net of 150 million tons of annual steel capacity is slated to be shut between 2016 and 2020, as are aluminum plants that were built without government approval. 
At the same time, in 2014, the government launched a plan, called International Capacity Cooperation, that enlisted Chinese state financial institutions to help manufacturers add production overseas.
Analysts and Western government and industry officials say Chinese manufacturers are receiving hundreds of billions of dollars of state support to build and purchase plants on foreign soil, through money provided by institutions such as China Development Bank, Bank of China and funds like China Investment Corp. 
The overseas plants are likely to be tapped as exclusive suppliers for the “One Belt, One Road” initiative, Beijing’s trillion-dollar infrastructure plan to project economic influence across Eurasia and Africa.
“China is just moving whole industrial clusters to external geographies and then continuing to overproduce steel, aluminum, cement, plate glass, textiles, etc.,” says Tristan Kenderdine, research director at Future Risk, a consulting firm that tracks China’s overseas investments. 
“None of this is economically viable under a supply-demand regime without state subsidies.”
Chinese steel companies have signed agreements to build plants in Malaysia, Pakistan, India and elsewhere.
In northern Brazil, a Chinese consortium is expected to break ground later this year on an $8 billion project to build one of the world’s biggest steel plants, expanding Brazil’s potential steel output even though the industry there operates at less than 70% of capacity.
This is total nonsense, with all the idle capacity that we have,” says Alexandre Lyra, chairman of the Brazilian Steel Institute, which represents Brazilian producers.
Chinese companies also are building new steel mills in Indonesia
Last year, Tsingshan Group Holdings, a state-backed steel producer based in Wenzhou on China’s southeastern coast, opened a two-million-ton stainless-steel plant on the Indonesian island of Sulawesi that accounts for 4% of the world’s stainless-steel production. 
The mill, built using a $570 million loan from the China Development Bank, is now pushing down prices from Asia to the U.S., industry executives and analysts say.
“We are seeing tenders in the area from Tsingshan at very, very, competitive prices,” Miguel Ferrandis Torres, financial director at stainless-steel companyAcerinox , told analysts in April. Tsingshan is likely losing money on those shipments from its Indonesian plant, Mr. Torres said.
Tsingshan declined to comment.
Tsingshan’s product is entering the U.S. through a joint venture with Pittsburgh-based stainless-steel producer Allegheny Technologies Inc. 
The joint venture is restarting a stainless-steel rolling plant in western Pennsylvania that Allegheny had shut in 2016 partly because of pressure from inexpensive Chinese imports. 
The new company is importing 300,000 metric tons of semifinished stainless-steel slabs from Tsingshan’s Indonesian plant—replacing slab Allegheny made in a now-closed production line—and processing them into sheets for products ranging from household appliances to medical equipment.
That put downward pressure on U.S. stainless-steel prices last year, industry executives say. 
“We’re moving from being a high-cost producer, which we’ve been for a while, to being the low-cost producer in the market,” Robert Wetherbee, an Allegheny executive, told analysts in November.
The Trump tariffs that came into force in March hit the stainless steel Tsingshan was importing from Indonesia to its joint-venture plant in Pennsylvania. 
Allegheny has asked the Trump administration for an exemption from the tariffs on those imports.
Tsingshan is expanding its Indonesian plant, and Jiangsu Delong, a Chinese producer based in Jiangsu province, is building another plant nearby. 
Those projects alone will increase global stainless-steel capacity by 9% from 2017 levels, according to Michael Finch, a steel analyst at  CRU Group in London, even though the stainless-steel industry has significant spare capacity.

Hebei province, a pollution-choked region near Beijing, is home to steelmaking operations like this one in Qian'an. 

In 2014, officials from Hebei province, a pollution-choked steelmaking region near Beijing, began hunting for overseas investments for the province’s most important company: Hebei Iron & Steel Group, renamed Hesteel Group in 2016.
When Hebei officials approached the Serbian government in 2014 about investment opportunities in the country, Belgrade immediately thought of the Železara Smederevo steel company, which had a mill on the Danube River, say people familiar with the deal.
The Serbian government had purchased the plant in 2012 for $1 from United States Steel Corp. 
After shutting the plant for several months, Belgrade restarted it to make it attractive for potential buyers, pumping tens of millions of dollars into it to keep it alive.
But with its public finances deteriorating, Serbia in 2014 sought a standby loan facility from the International Monetary Fund, which along with the European Commission, ordered it to stop subsidizing the steel company.
In early 2015, the Serbian government pulled the plug on subsidies for Železara, says Bojan Bojkovic, who was in charge of efforts to sell the mill for the Serbian government. 
“A lot of people, especially so-called economists, wanted to shut it down immediately,” he says.
Meanwhile, in March 2015, Hesteel signed an agreement with China Investment Corp., which has more than $200 billion in foreign assets, to fund Hesteel’s overseas expansion.

Beijing touted the $54 million acquisition of the steel plant in Serbia as one of China’s flagship overseas investments. 

During the talks with the Serbians, Hesteel pledged to invest at least $300 million in the plant over the next three years. 
Beijing touted the €46 million ($54 million) acquisition as one of China’s flagship overseas investments. 
Chinese dictator Xi Jinping visited the mill for the June 2016 signing ceremony.
Hesteel executives have said that they quickly turned around the money-losing plant after taking control in June 2016. 
Serbian corporate records show an operating loss of $34 million over the next six months. 
Records for 2017 aren’t yet available.
“This is all part of a huge political initiative,” says Markus Taube, professor of East Asian economic studies at the Mercator School of Management in Duisburg, Germany. 
“They are extremely insensitive to losses.”
The EU for years has applied tariffs to low-price Chinese steel exports. 
Now, Hesteel’s Serbian plant can export tariff-free into the 28-nation bloc.
“We feel like the Serbian plant is a Trojan horse,” says Sonia Nalpantidou, a trade-policy expert with Eurofer, a trade association representing EU steel producers.
At a steel expo in Beijing last month, a “Hesteel of the World” banner hung near the company’s booth. 
Pins in a map marked countries where Hesteel had invested—Serbia, Macedonia, Switzerland, South Africa, Australia and the U.S. 
A company representative said overseas expansion is now a core strategy. 
The company is planning to build more plants in regions such as North America, she said, and plans to derive 20% of revenue from non-Chinese markets by 2020.
“Products made in Europe shouldn’t be subject to European tariffs,” the representative said.
Late last year, Hesteel offered $1.5 billion for a large steel mill in Slovakia owned by United States Steel, according to a person familiar with the talks. 
The Slovak prime minister said last month that U.S. Steel wouldn’t sell the plant to Hesteel. 
A U.S. Steel spokeswoman declined to comment.

After purchasing the plant in Serbia, Hesteel began selling its output onto the U.S. market. 

After purchasing the plant in Serbia, Hesteel began selling its output, including a sheet-steel product called wide hot-rolled coil, onto the U.S. market through Duferco, a Swiss trading company in which it owns a 51% stake.
Since 2001, China’s domestic producers of that product have faced antidumping tariffs of more than 64% at U.S. borders, effectively shutting them out of the market. 
Hesteel’s Serbian plant could export to the U.S. with minimal tariffs—until the additional Trump tariffs took effect earlier this year.
In March, one of the Serbian plant’s U.S. customers, Priefert Ranch Equipment of Mount Pleasant, Texas, asked the Trump administration for an exemption from the tariff to import 24,000 metric tons of steel sheet annually made at the plant. 
Priefert argued that it has long relied on overseas steel mills to supply product that domestic mills don’t produce. 
Priefert executives didn’t respond to a request for comment. 
The Trump administration hasn’t yet decided on the request.
“We want to be the world’s Hesteel,” Yu Yong, the company’s chairman, said when he signed the deal to buy the Serbian plant. 
He pledged to make the Serbia plant “the most competitive steelmaker in Europe.”

lundi 28 novembre 2016

Sina Delenda Est

As Trump prepares for office, concerns about China’s unfair trade and investment practices intensify
By Simon Denyer

A Chinese laboorer works at an unauthorized steel factory, foreground, on Nov. 4, 2016, in Inner Mongolia, China. 

BEIJING — Around the world, concerns are mounting about China’s unfair trade and investment practices
How Donald Trump responds could have a far-reaching impact on the global economy and financial markets.
Trump has threatened to declare China a currency manipulator, but experts say he has little legal or economic basis to take such a step. 
He has also threatened to impose a tariff of up to 45 percent on Chinese imports if Beijing doesn’t “behave,” a move that could lead to a trade war and damage the economies of both nations.
Yet he is not alone in sounding the alarm about unfair competition and a playing field sharply tilted in China’s favor. 
And there are plenty of options on the table if he wants to show he is tougher than his predecessor.
The American Chamber of Commerce in China, which usually is very measured in any criticism of China, complained this month about a rise in Chinese protectionism and “economic hegemony,” with doors closing to foreign investment, regulations biased against foreign companies, and new national security-related laws breeding “distrust and paranoia.”
The United States “needs to raise its game with the Chinese to drive for a sense of urgency” in dealing with these issues, it said.
But it is not just the treatment of foreign companies in China, and their lack of access to the Chinese market, that has raised tensions.
Chinese companies are also engaged in a state-sponsored buying spree of foreign companies, diplomats and experts say, in sectors identified by the government as key to an industrial modernization strategy known as Made in China 2025.
China has been using the state’s vast financial resources to buy up key foreign innovation and technology, often in sectors where the Chinese economy is largely closed to inward investment.

So as U.S. investment into China slowly declines, Chinese investment into the United States has surged, overtaking money going the other way for the first time in 2015, according to a new report by the Rhodium Group, an economic research consulting firm.
It is a similar story in Europe
Trade tensions between China and Germany have ratcheted up this year.
Ambassador Michael Clauss talks of an “unprecedented wave” of complaints by German companies about the problems of doing business here, and a “definite rise in protectionism” — at the same time as China pours billions of dollars into buying German firms, including several of its most innovative high-tech companies.
That has raised deep concerns in Berlin about national security and Germany’s ability to innovate in the future.
“This is not just an American problem,” Clauss said. 
“China has to realize these concerns are real.”
In Washington this month, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission recommended changing U.S. law to bar state-owned Chinese companies from buying American businesses.
“We don’t want the U.S. government owning large chunks of the U.S. economy, so why do we want the Chinese Communist Party owning large chunks of the U.S. economy?” asked Dennis Shea, the Republican chairman of the bipartisan commission.
So what are Trump’s options?
To judge China a currency manipulator under U.S. law, the Treasury Department would have to determine that it runs a “significant” bilateral trade surplus with the United States, a “material” current account surplus, and is “engaged in persistent one-sided intervention in the foreign exchange market.”
Although China has by far the largest trade surplus with the United States of any country — $356 billion in 2015 — its current account surplus is under 3 percent of gross domestic product, and it has actually been intervening to prop up its currency, not depress its value.
In other words, it met only one of the three criteria last year, the Treasury Department reported
“It would be difficult for the new administration to direct the Treasury to say China is a currency manipulator,” said Eric Shimp, a policy adviser at Alston & Bird in Washington, and a former U.S. diplomat and trade negotiator.
Still, Shimp said, a Trump administration could initiate a broader investigation into China’s trade practices and the state subsidies Chinese exporters enjoy.
Across-the-board punitive tariffs are unlikely, not least because they would invite likely Chinese retaliation that could bring down entire industries, experts said. 
But specific measures are possible in specific industries.
In Washington last week, Chinese Vice Premier Wang Yang said that problems in the trade relationship could damage the global economic recovery and that cooperation was “the only right choice.”
Chinese media have warned of canceled orders for Boeing aircraft, depressed iPhone sales and halted corn and soybean imports if a trade war erupted.
Nevertheless, Trump will be looking closely at the steel industry, especially with Dan DiMicco, former chief executive of the steel company Nucor, leading his transition team at the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.
The Obama administration has already imposed heavy anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties on some types of Chinese steel, but Shimp said broader tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports might be considered under U.S. “global safeguard” rules — if a Trump administration decides that rising imports have caused “serious” economic injury.
“The harm to global industry from China’s excess capacity in steel and aluminum are well known,” said Claire Reade, senior counsel at Arnold & Porter in Washington and former assistant U.S. trade representative for China. 
“If Trump took action to curb this injury, China would not find itself holding the moral high ground in international public opinion. This might temper any reaction.”
Similarly, a blanket ban on investment by Chinese state-owned companies appears unlikely, experts say. 
The Rhodium Group said Chinese firms employ more than 100,000 people in the United States, and experts say there is still an appetite for investment that rescues indebted companies, builds infrastructure and creates jobs.
But experts expect greater scrutiny of who is behind the deals and where the money is coming from.
Trump prides himself on being the consummate dealmaker, and whether his dire warnings were a negotiating tactic remains in question.
“You’ve thrown out the bomb on tariffs, now let’s use that as leverage,” said Christopher Balding, an associate professor at the HSBC Business School in Shenzhen, China.
But there are risks. 
For one, it is far from certain that China will agree to the sort of demands Trump might make: strengthening big state-owned companies is central to its current economic strategy.
The temptation for Trump to show his supporters that he is standing up to China, and Beijing’s desire to stand strong, means that some kind of action-reaction sequence is entirely possible.