Skip to main content

China warns the EU.

 

China
Europe should reject Wash­ing­ton’s demands to curb trade with Beijing, a senior Chinese dip­lo­mat has warned, say­ing that any coun­try that shred­ded busi­ness ties with his nation would do so «at their peril».

Fu Cong, China’s EU ambas­sador, said the US would «stop at noth­ing» to dis­rupt nor­mal ties between the bloc and China, adding that a «pro­tec­tion­ist tend­ency» was on the rise in Europe.

«Who in their right mind would aban­don such a thriv­ing mar­ket as big as China?» Fu told the Fin­an­cial Times, warn­ing politi­cians not to under­mine pos­it­ive busi­ness sen­ti­ment towards China. «It will only be at their peril».

«We do hope that the European gov­ern­ments and the European politi­cians can see where their interests lie and then res­ist the unwar­ran­ted pres­sure from the US,» Fu said.

Refer­ring to the Neth­er­lands, he added: «They need to be mind­ful of the fact that China can­not just sit there and see its interests being trampled like this without tak­ing any actions in response».

Fu was speak­ing as the European Com­mis­sion pres­id­ent vowed to tighten scru­tiny of trade and invest­ment flows in sens­it­ive areas such as quantum com­put­ing and arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence.

Brus­sels must develop «new defens­ive tools» as it updates its secur­ity policies in the face of an increas­ingly assert­ive China, Ursula von der Leyen said in a speech.

Von der Leyen is seek­ing to steer a dis­tinct line from the US, stress­ing her goal is not to «decouple» from China but to «de-risk».

China’s busi­ness ties with some European coun­tries remain strong. For example, Ger­man com­pan­ies inves­ted a record €11.5bn in China last year, accord­ing to a paper pub­lished this week by Ger­man think­tank Insti­tut der deutschen Wirtschaft.

Recent EU pro­pos­als to reduce depend­ence on Chinese imports include improv­ing sup­plies of crit­ical raw mater­i­als and boost­ing domestic pro­duc­tion of green tech­no­logy. New trade defence tools also empower the EU to retali­ate against eco­nomic intim­id­a­tion and curb access for Chinese state-sub­sid­ised pro­du­cers using forced labour.

www.sba.tax

Labels:

Comments

  1. Sam31 March 2023 at 09:29

    The EU needs to watch out for its own interests. People living in the EU need both products from the US and products from China. Cutting ties with any of them would be a big mistake. It's good to find alternatives to China but at the moment the EU still needs to do a lot of business with them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Veronica31 March 2023 at 09:55

      Alternatives should be found but it takes time. The big problem is the areas where the EU is dependent on China for things. Those areas need to be addressed first so that in 5 or 10 years, things are much different.

      Delete
  2. Nicholas31 March 2023 at 10:04

    Economic intimidation shouldn't be an issue for the EU in the next few years as they go for other options besides China. It's clear China can and surely will use this tactic and others in the future, when it suits its interests. You can rely on a dictatorial country for important products. Also there are many products that are of conscionable quality from China and alternatives should be found quickly.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Cloud Bookkeeping

HS2 cost cuts new routes and add delays.

 Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have begun work on «Project Sil­ver­light» sug­gest­ing the high­speed rail scheme might face four addi­tional years of delay. The planned High Speed 2 rail line faces fur­ther delays of up to four years and more cuts to the project under plans being drawn up by min­is­ters to rein in its bal­loon­ing costs. The extra delays to the coun­try’s biggest infra­struc­ture project would mean that it would not be com­pleted until as late as 2045 — 12 years after ori­gin­ally planned. «This is a func­tion of infla­tion; we are hav­ing to find huge sav­ings because the cost of everything the depart­ment is already doing will have become so much more expens­ive by then,» said one gov­ern­ment offi­cial. In Octo­ber, the FT repor­ted that the Treas­ury had asked HS2’s man­age­ment team to identify poten­tial cuts or «scope reduc­tions» to the high-speed line. Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have sub­sequently begun work on Project Sil­ver­light aimed at fi...
4 comments
Read more

Doubt on CS's collateral.

  Credit Suisse provided an emergency $140mn loan to Greensill Capital based partly on invoices to companies that deny ever doing the business stated on the documents. The Swiss bank provided the loan in October 2020, less than five months before the collapse of Greensill, a supply chain finance firm that counted former British prime minister David Cameron as a senior adviser. Invoices issued by metals magnate Sanjeev Gupta’s Liberty Commodities and sold to Greensill formed part of the collateral for the loan, according to documents seen by the Financial Times and people familiar with the transaction. Yet several of the parties named on the invoices have told the FT they did no business with Liberty. GFG has consistently denied any wrongdoing. Credit Suisse’s loan had a clause dictating that the collateral value had to be equal to or greater than the $140mn borrowed. The terms of the debt agreement only allowed invoices on Green-sill’s balance sheet to count towards this tally if t...
2 comments
Read more

Small business will be excluded from fraud law.

  Min­is­ters are plan­ning to exclude small busi­nesses from anti-fraud legis­la­tion by nar­row­ing the scope of a crim­inal offence tar­get­ing com­pan­ies that fail to pre­vent eco­nomic crimes. MPs and anti-cor­rup­tion cam­paign­ers had hoped the gov­ern­ment would seek to amend the eco­nomic crime and cor­por­ate trans­par­ency bill to ensure the new offence covered all com­pan­ies. The plans to limit the scope of the amend­ments will also dis­ap­point those who had hoped the legis­la­tion would remove key hurdles to the pro­sec­u­tion of white-col­lar crime. A new «fail­ure to pre­vent» offence for fraud would bring it in line with exist­ing sim­ilar cor­por­ate offences for bribery and tax eva­sion. At present, pro­sec­utors need only prove that organ­isa­tions lacked «reas­on­able» or «adequate» con­trols to pur­sue the offence in bribery and tax eva­sion cases. «It would be much more sens­ible for the gov­ern­ment to provide strong guid­ance for SMEs on what these pro­ce...
3 comments
Read more