Opening speaker, Brian Gordon, SVP and Manager of the International Banking Group at Commerce Bank, advocated for the U.S. to adopt a more trade-centric economic mentality.

“Trade, not aid!” said Gordon. “When you export products, you’re importing money […] and that floats all boats higher.”

In a discussion about emerging economies, Gordon iterated that trade agreements are negotiations and not win-lose situations and told audiences that agriculture will be one of the most interesting and rapidly developing trade sectors throughout the next few years.

Gordon concluded by discussing China’s Belt and Road Initiative, warning audiences to keep a close eye on the global economic landscape and alluding to the reality of economic gaps facilitating an opportunity for the U.S. to implement a new Marshall Plan.

Melissa Miller, senior manager at the World Trade Center KC, spoke next. Outlining the trade and export scene in Kansas City, Miller reported that Kansas City outperformed the U.S. throughout the recession and, in 2016, was the 44th largest exporter in the nation generating about 6.7 billion dollars in value from exports.

“It must have been our midwestern risk-adverseness,” said Miller.

Continuing with a list of benefits to global trade, Miller stated that companies which trade globally pay workers an average of 20 percent more than those which don’t and that one-in-five jobs in the U.S. are trade dependent, implying that increasing trade will boost national the job market. These claims are echoed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Regional manager of the U.S. Small Business Administration Office of International Trade Larry Cresswell was next to speak.

Cresswell, an employee of the federal government, presented the official definition of a small business – fewer than 500 employees for manufacturing businesses and less than 7.5 million dollars in annual receipts for most non-manufacturing businesses – and discussed loan options the government offers small business owners who trade internationally.

Larry Cresswell discusses small business.

The final speaker, Mark Klein, regional director of the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (EXIM), presented statistics about the U.S. as an international economy in comparison to the economies of other nations.

While the U.S. is one of the world’s largest exporters of goods, second only to China, Klein believes that more funds ought to be directed towards developing this segment of national business. With only 14 percent of the U.S. GDP coming from exports, Klein does not believe that this accurately reflects the amount of resources the country has.

“Hanging out with Rwanda and Haiti is probably not the cocktail party we want to be at,” Klein said when discussing nations that devote a similar percentage of their GDP to exports.

Yet, Klein warned U.S. business owners to exercise caution when exporting products and to seek the assistance of the Federal Government.

“Turkey right now is a political risk issue, Argentina that’s a political risk issue… there’s some strange things going on in those countries that might prevent them from making a payment. Luckily we [the federal government] can protect [U.S. businesses] against that,” said Klein.

Elaborating, Klein outlined three restrictions to protections the government offers businesses – the U.S. Content Policy, Military Policy and Country Limitation Schedule. So long as companies within the U.S. do not violate the clauses of any of these policies the government will assist the owners in ensuring that they are compensated for exported products.

But, as Klein explained, the policies should not be considered restrictive.

“I don’t care if the little rubber buttons come from Vietnam or if the wiring inside comes from China. I just want to know that it was designed in the U.S. and assembled in the U.S.,” said Klein using a remote control as an example of an export good. “So long as at least 50 percent of the product, on a cost basis, can be traced back to the U.S. it fulfills our content policy.”

The event concluded with a panel session during which time the four speakers answered questions from the audience.

The summit was sponsored by the World Trade Center of Kansas City and Commerce Bank. Entities including the Liberty Economic Development Corporation, the Liberty Area Chamber of Commerce and Jewell supported the event.

On March 9, Trump followed through on his promises to impose tariffs on steel imports. The tariffs taxed steel at 25 percent and aluminum at 10 percent. China called the tariffs a serious attack on international trade and threatened “firm action” if Chinese businesses were negatively impacted.

On April 2, Beijing imposed tariffs on U.S. imports worth about $3 billion. The tariffs taxed 120 products at 15 percent and another eight products at 25 percent, including pork and recycled aluminum. The next day, Trump threatened to strike back with a 25 percent tax on 1300 Chinese aerospace goods.

On April 4, China threatened retaliatory tariffs of 25 percent on U.S. products totaling around $50 billion. The products on the list include aircraft and automobile products, soybeans and chemicals.  They were approximately equivalent in value to the tariffs to which they were responding.

On April 5, Trump called for more tariffs worth around $100 billion, and China threatened further response. All of the tariffs threatened and imposed by China were specifically chosen in order to target products that may harm members of Trump’s base. They were aimed at states with Republican representatives in order to anger the base, which may pressure Trump to lessen tensions.

On April 9, Chinese President Xi JinPing renewed his pledge to reopen China’s markets for further trade and investment. He pledged to work to boost imports. The speech, while lacking any new claims or initiatives, was perceived as a conciliatory message in the escalating trade situation. Xi agreed to significantly lower import tariffs on vehicles, ease restrictions on foreign investment in auto and financial services and increase protection of intellectual property. The sentiment appeared to partially diffuse the situation, with Trump responding positively on Twitter.

The recent developments appear to indicate that the two countries navigated the trade conflict while avoiding a full-scale trade war.

Photo credits to Reuters / Damir Sagolj.