BEIJING, March 13 (Reuters) – China on Friday rebuked a U.S. trade investigation into alleged overcapacity and said it reserved the right to take countermeasures, clouding the outlook for a new round of trade talks that is set to begin this weekend.
The U.S. has no right to “unilaterally” determine whether a trading partner has “overcapacity” through its Section 301 investigation and take unilateral restrictive measures, China’s Commerce Ministry said in a statement.
China was named as one of the trading partners targeted by the U.S. when it unveiled on Wednesday investigations into excess industrial capacity and forced labour.
China is conducting an assessment of the probes and reserves the right to take all necessary measures to defend its rights and interests, the ministry said.
A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry on Friday denied the forced labour allegation, calling it “a lie concocted by the U.S.”
The trade investigations added to the list of thorny issues that Beijing and Washington will have to hash out as they gear up for U.S. President Donald Trump’s planned visit to Beijing at the end of March to meet with Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.
The trade talks in France, confirmed by China’s Commerce Ministry on Friday, are expected to lay the groundwork for the summit.
China said Vice Premier He Lifeng will lead a delegation to France from March 14 to March 17 for the talks, while the U.S. delegation is expected to include Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer.
It will be the sixth round of negotiations since Trump last year singled out Beijing with tariff increases. Beijing retaliated with export curbs of critical minerals and its own tariff measures, pushing import duties on each other’s goods to prohibitive levels.
Through a truce reached in previous negotiations and a leaders’ summit in South Korea late October, China and the U.S. have both since walked back most of their trade measures.
(Reporting by Ethan Wang, Yukun Zhang and Colleen Howe; Editing by Christopher Cushing and Thomas Derpinghaus)
Comments