Today, June 11th, U.S. Commerce Secretary Lutnik, who has just concluded trade negotiations with China in London, wrote: "It's fantastic to work with Treasury Secretary Scott Beasant and Trade Ambassador Jamie Greer. A world-class team brings world-class results for the United States."
Lutnik made these remarks in response to a post Trump released tonight, where Trump claimed: "The agreement between the United States and China is settled, it just needs final confirmation from him and the Chinese leader. He mentioned that China will supply all the needed magnets and rare earths to the United States in advance, and the United States will also provide corresponding things to China as per the agreement, such as allowing Chinese students to continue studying at American universities and colleges (he mentioned he has never had any objection to this). He also mentioned that the United States will be levied a 10% tariff, while China will be levied a 55% tariff, and said that the relationship between both sides is 'excellent', thanking everyone for paying attention to this matter."
Trump's post raises many doubts, and its authenticity is questionable. Judging from past U.S.-China economic and trade negotiation realities and official information, many key contents are inconsistent with the facts.
First, regarding the tariff part, adjustments of tariffs between the U.S. and China have always followed the principles of equal consultation and mutual respect, striving for mutual benefit and win-win outcomes, rather than such one-sided and disproportionate settings. In the "Joint Statement on U.S.-China Geneva Economic and Trade Talks" in May 2025, the U.S. reduced tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 30%, while China simultaneously reduced tariffs on U.S. goods from 125% to 10%. This was a decision made based on the interests of both sides and global economic stability. The 10% and 55% tariff ratio mentioned by Trump completely contradicts normal negotiation logic and actual negotiation outcomes.
Secondly, regarding the mention of magnet and rare earth supplies, China is an important producer and exporter of magnets and rare earths. However, China considers multiple factors such as sustainable resource utilization, international market demand, and national security when formulating export policies for relevant resources, and will not unconditionally supply all products in advance. China has its own strategic plans for critical resources like rare earths, and will make reasonable arrangements according to international rules and bilateral agreements.
Thirdly, about allowing Chinese students to continue studying at American universities and colleges, the U.S. has previously implemented numerous policies restricting Chinese students. These policies not only harm Sino-U.S. educational exchanges but also damage the interests of American universities themselves. If this really is part of the agreement content, it should be the U.S. correcting its previous wrong practices and returning to normal educational exchange tracks, rather than mentioning it as some kind of "favor."
In international diplomacy and economic and trade negotiations, the conclusion of major agreements usually involves rigorous processes, multiple rounds of negotiations, and official statements. It cannot be confirmed simply based on a personal post by Trump. Therefore, Trump's words seem more like his personal rhetoric, lacking sufficient credibility. Further attention should be paid to the formal statements and actions of official channels from both China and the U.S.
Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1834644263159811/
Disclaimer: The article solely represents the views of the author.