| 
						U.S. business in China 
						warms to possible Trump trade policy shake-up 
		 Send a link to a friend 
		
		 [February 15, 2017] 
		By Michael Martina and Matthew Miller 
 BEIJING 
		(Reuters) - "Reciprocity" has become the new buzzword in the U.S. 
		business community in China, with some industry leaders saying they 
		would welcome a tougher approach from the Trump administration in 
		opening up the markets of the world's second-largest economy.
 
 It's a striking shift within the American community here, which had long 
		lobbied Washington against taking more aggressive policies, fearing they 
		could draw retribution from China's leaders.
 
 President Donald Trump's picks for Commerce Secretary and Trade 
		Representative, Wilbur Ross and Robert Lighthizer, have in the past 
		backed the reciprocity principle when it comes to China: that Beijing 
		should provide the same access and benefits to American business in 
		China that Washington gives the Chinese in the United States.
 
 "Our membership has moved to some extent in that direction as well, in 
		advocating a firmer posture with respect to China," said Lester Ross, 
		chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China's policy 
		committee.
 
 He made the remarks in January after the group issued a report that 
		found over 60 percent of the chamber's members had "little or no 
		confidence that the Chinese government is committed to opening markets 
		further in the next three years".
 
 Many sectors of China's economy are either off limits or severely 
		restricted to foreign investors.
 
 Foreign banks in China, for example, account for less than 2 percent of 
		total assets, according to the China Banking Regulatory Commission.
 
		
		 
		A 50-percent ownership cap for foreign life insurers, despite China's 
		2001 World Trade Organization commitments to lift it, has helped limit 
		their market share to about 6 percent.
 China's Anbang Insurance Group <ANBANG.UL>, on the other hand, has spent 
		more than $8 billion acquiring U.S. assets, including the Waldorf 
		Astoria Hotel and Strategic Hotels & Resorts. It is still waiting for 
		regulatory approval to buy U.S. life insurer Fidelity & Guaranty Life <FGL.N> 
		for $1.6 billion.
 
 "CHINA HAS OVERREACHED"
 
 The same imbalances can be seen in sectors such as automotives, payment 
		cards and technology.
 
 China's Geely Holding Group [GEELY.UL] bought Volvo from Ford Motor Co. 
		<F.N> in 2010, but foreign companies are required to set up joint 
		ventures to assemble vehicles in China, often transferring technology in 
		the process.
 
 While China's UnionPay has grown to become the world's largest payment 
		card, according to the number of cards issued, U.S. credit card 
		operators Visa <V.N> and MasterCard <MA.N> have yet to be independently 
		licensed to clear transactions in China, despite a 2012 WTO ruling 
		mandating that Beijing open the sector.
 
 Foreign technology hardware and service providers are bristling at 
		requirements to meet the restrictive terms of newly minted cyber 
		security regulations. Beijing's "Made in China 2025" plan also calls for 
		a progressive increase in domestic parts used in priority sectors, such 
		as advanced information technology and robotics to 70 percent by 2025.
 
 James McGregor, Chairman of APCO Worldwide, Greater China, said the idea 
		of some form of reciprocity is gaining traction, particularly in 
		combating "techno-nationalism". "You've got Chinese companies that have 
		protected markets and make loads of money and then they are going out 
		and doing international acquisitions that could destroy other 
		companies," McGregor said. "Now China has overreached so much they have 
		alienated much of the business community."
 
		
            [to top of second column] | 
            
			 
            
			An attendant cleans the carpet next to U.S. and Chinese national 
			flags before a news conference for the 6th round of U.S.-China 
			Strategic and Economic Dialogue at the Great Hall of the People in 
			Beijing, July 10, 2014. REUTERS/Jason Lee/File Photo 
            
			 
		
		McGregor said U.S. policy makers had to figure out how to use America's 
		openness and rule of law to deal with China, instead of allowing them to 
		become vulnerabilities. The question is how to craft a reciprocity 
		policy without destabilizing bilateral relations or triggering a 
		retaliatory backlash against U.S. businesses in China.
 Chinese state media has warned that U.S. businesses could be targets in 
		any trade war that Trump may unleash - he has threatened to label China 
		a currency manipulator and slap heavy tariffs on Chinese goods.
 
 China's Ministry of Commerce did not respond to a request for comment on 
		the issue of reciprocity.
 
 But Tu Xinquan, a trade expert at Beijing's University of International 
		Business and Economics, said Trump's options would be limited by his 
		promises to create jobs.
 
 "If you close the door to Chinese investments, that's not good for 
		American employment," Tu said.
 
		
		BAD POLICY
 One way to achieve reciprocity would be to use the Committee on Foreign 
		Investment in the United States (CFIUS) security review process to wall 
		off industries where U.S. businesses face discrimination in China. But 
		most experts see that as straying too far from the free market orthodoxy 
		that has drawn investment and jobs to the United States for decades.
 
 James Zimmerman, a Beijing-based lawyer with Sheppard Mullin and a 
		former chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, said 
		strict reciprocity would be bad policy and against the U.S. system of 
		open investment.
 
 "We need to be very careful what we ask for," Zimmerman said.
 
 Proponents argue reciprocity does not violate free market principles, 
		but is a needed intervention due to a market failure, much as the 
		government uses antitrust policy to crack down on cartels.
 
 
		  
		
		Thilo Hanemann, in a Rhodium Group report to the U.S.-China Economic and 
		Security Review Commission, said simple calls for reciprocity are 
		"misguided". But, he added, if China's "commingling of commercial and 
		political motives is not resolved, then a new chapter in U.S. – and 
		global – competition policy activism may be required."
 
 (Reporting by Michael Martina and Matthew Miller in BEIJING; Editing by 
		Bill Tarrant)
 
			[© 2017 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2017 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. 
			
			 
			
			
			 |