Trade war: Has Donald Trump misjudged China?

With the Chinese yuan's latest depreciation, China is upping the ante in its trade war with the US.

This has significant market and economic implications, says Keith Wade, chief economist and strategist at Schroders.

"Increased trade tensions will put further downward pressure on global activity, with investment plans likely to be delayed or cancelled and trade suffering. China and the Asian supply chain will be most affected, but US growth will also suffer," says Wade.

"Alongside a stronger US dollar, such an environment may well lead the US Federal Reserve to cut rates faster and further. Such a move may please the president and yet, whilst he could reverse his decision on tariffs with a tweet, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that he has misjudged China's reaction."

The Chinese yuan has fallen below 7.0 to the US dollar for the first time in a decade, a level which has been widely seen as a line in the sand for the currency, according to Wade.

He explains that the move follows US President Donald Trump's decision to impose 10% tariffs on $300bn of Chinese imports last week.

"This is not a coincidence. Rather than backing down in response to the US, China is upping the ante," says Wade.

"The exchange rate had been on the agenda at the trade talks, with China refraining from allowing the currency to weaken whilst negotiations seemed to be making progress."

Along with the move in the Chinese yuan, China has asked its state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to suspend purchases of agricultural imports from the US.  

"As in the last period of concern over the Chinese yuan in 2015, markets have reacted adversely. Risk assets have sold off and safe havens such as government bonds and the Japanese yen are rallying," says Wade.

He explains that in 2015 uncertainty over the direction of China's currency was significant as the authorities had not communicated their change of strategy to the markets.

"Today there is a clearer framework in place, and there are other differences. For example, in 2015 firms' currency exposures were unhedged and unprepared for any currency weakness," says Wade.

"Many borrowed in external currency simply to take advantage of the carry trade. The shock of 2015 and the greater two-way volatility since then, reinforced by messaging from the People's Bank of China, means that there is less of a mismatch on corporate balance sheets."

In his view, messaging around the weakness is also clearer today than in 2015, when the reason for the devaluation was not obvious and so was interpreted as a sign of underlying economic weakness.

"In short, we would not expect a repeat today. China had wanted tariffs to be removed as part of any deal, so by doing the opposite Trump was effectively delivering a rebuke," says Wade.

"The problem now is that both sides could get into a position where they cannot back down without losing face. Consequently, the prospect of a deal has diminished and the risks of escalation have risen."

Brent Crude
All Share
Top 40
Financial 15
Industrial 25
Resource 10
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes morningstar logo
Company Snapshot
Voting Booth
Do you think it was a good idea for the government to approach the IMF for a $4.3 billion loan to fight Covid-19?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Yes. We need the money.
11% - 837 votes
It depends on how the funds are used.
74% - 5556 votes
No. We should have gotten the loan elsewhere.
15% - 1111 votes