Germany’s Economy Minister Robert Habeck clarified that proposed European Union tariffs on Chinese goods are not intended as a punishment during a visit to Beijing on Saturday. This visit marks the first by a senior European official since the EU suggested imposing substantial duties on Chinese-made electric vehicles (EVs) in response to what it perceives as excessive subsidies.

EU Tariffs: A Measure for Fair Competition

Habeck emphasized in a climate and transformation dialogue session that the proposed tariffs are not punitive. “It is important to understand that these are not punitive tariffs,” he said, distinguishing the EU’s approach from that of other countries like the U.S., Brazil, and Turkey. “Europe does things differently.”

Habeck explained that the European Commission had conducted a thorough nine-month investigation to determine whether Chinese companies had unfairly benefited from subsidies. The proposed countervailing duties are intended to level the playing field, compensating for the advantages granted to Chinese firms by their government. “Common, equal standards for market access should be achieved,” he asserted.

Dialogue with Chinese Officials

In discussions with Zheng Shanjie, chairman of China’s National Development and Reform Commission, Habeck reiterated that the EU’s proposed tariffs aim to ensure fair competition. Zheng responded firmly, stating, “We will do everything to protect Chinese companies.”

The EU’s provisional duties are set to take effect by July 4, with the investigation continuing until November 2. Final duties, potentially lasting five years, could be imposed based on the investigation’s findings. Habeck encouraged Chinese officials to engage in dialogue regarding the EU report’s conclusions, stating, “It’s important now to take the opportunity that the report provides seriously and to talk or negotiate.”

Focus on Climate Cooperation

While trade tensions were a key topic, the primary goal of Habeck’s visit was to enhance cooperation on climate change and the green transition. This meeting was the first plenary session of the climate and transformation dialogue since Germany and China signed a memorandum of understanding in June of the previous year.

Both nations acknowledged their significant responsibility to prevent global warming from exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels, a threshold deemed critical by scientists.

Renewable Energy and Emissions Concerns

Habeck commended China’s significant expansion of renewable energy, noting that China installed nearly 350 gigawatts of new renewable capacity in 2023, over half of the global total. The International Energy Agency (IEA) indicated that China might surpass its 2030 renewable energy targets this year. However, Habeck stressed the importance of considering overall CO2 emissions alongside the expansion of renewables.

“China has a coal-based energy mix,” Zheng acknowledged, noting that coal still accounted for nearly 60% of China’s electricity supply in 2023. China, along with India and Indonesia, is responsible for nearly 75% of global coal consumption, as these countries prioritize energy security and affordability over carbon emissions.

Zheng explained that China is building coal-fired power plants as a security measure. Habeck, however, suggested, “I still believe that the enormous expansion of coal power can be done differently if one considers the implication of renewables in the system.”

Habeck’s visit underscores the delicate balance between fostering international cooperation on climate goals and addressing trade disputes to ensure fair market practices.

Banking regulators have disclosed deficiencies in the resolution plans, or “living wills,” of four of the eight largest American lenders. The Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) announced on Friday that the 2023 resolution plans submitted by Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America were found inadequate.

Concerns Over Derivatives Portfolios

The primary issue identified by regulators was the banks’ strategies for unwinding their extensive derivatives portfolios. Derivatives are complex financial instruments tied to the value of assets such as stocks, bonds, currencies, or interest rates. The regulators’ assessment revealed significant shortcomings in the banks’ ability to effectively manage these portfolios in a crisis.

For instance, Citigroup was tested on its ability to unwind its contracts using different scenarios than those initially proposed by the bank. The results indicated material limitations in Citigroup’s capabilities, a problem that also affected the other banks evaluated.

Regulatory Findings and Responses

The living wills exercise, mandated post-2008 financial crisis, requires major U.S. banks to submit plans every two years demonstrating their ability to orderly unwind operations without triggering widespread economic disruption. Regulators identified a “shortcoming” in the resolution plans of JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America. However, Citigroup’s plan was classified as having a more serious “deficiency” by the FDIC, indicating it would not ensure an orderly resolution under U.S. bankruptcy law. The Federal Reserve, while noting shortcomings, did not fully concur with the FDIC’s severe assessment of Citigroup.

In response, Citigroup expressed commitment to addressing the issues highlighted by regulators. “We are fully committed to addressing the issues identified by our regulators,” the bank stated. “While we’ve made substantial progress on our transformation, we’ve acknowledged that we have had to accelerate our work in certain areas. More broadly, we continue to have confidence that Citi could be resolved without an adverse systemic impact or the need for taxpayer funds.”

JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America declined to comment on the findings.

Looking Ahead

The identified weaknesses must be addressed by the next round of living will submissions, due in 2025. This regulatory exercise remains a crucial measure to ensure that major financial institutions can be dismantled in a manner that prevents systemic risks and protects the broader economy.

Regulators’ scrutiny and the banks’ subsequent improvements will be closely watched, as they play a critical role in maintaining financial stability and preventing future crises similar to the one experienced in 2008.