US Reaches Deal To Keep Chinese Telecom ZTE in Business (reuters.com) 104
The Trump administration told lawmakers the U.S. government has reached a deal to put Chinese telecommunications company ZTE Corp back in business, a senior congressional aide said on Friday. From a report: The deal, communicated to officials on Capitol Hill by the Commerce Department, requires ZTE to pay a substantial fine, place U.S. compliance officers at the company and change its management team, the aide said. The Commerce Department would then lift an order preventing ZTE from buying U.S. products.
ZTE was banned in April from buying U.S. technology components for seven years for breaking an agreement reached after it violated U.S. sanctions against Iran and North Korea. The Commerce Department decision would allow it to resume business with U.S. companies, including chipmaker Qualcomm Inc.
ZTE was banned in April from buying U.S. technology components for seven years for breaking an agreement reached after it violated U.S. sanctions against Iran and North Korea. The Commerce Department decision would allow it to resume business with U.S. companies, including chipmaker Qualcomm Inc.
MAGA (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: MAGA (Score:2)
I'm as racist as necessary but I want to sarcastically say:
Yeah I'm sure a bunch of Chinese former ZTE workers would be such a loss for US of America.
Oh noz. The engineers are coming! STOP IT!
Re: (Score:1)
I don't know.
I don't know how many you assume are assembling products either.
I prefer not to guess and would want to know but I'm not sure I could just google the data.
I don't know if they built the phones themselves of if other companies put them together.
Re:MAGA (Score:5, Funny)
This will keep thousands of Chinese from losing their jobs, meaning they won't try to illegally immigrate to America. You have to see the big picture here.
True enough. And this will actually save the US a bunch of money as building a wall across the Pacific would be *really* expensive - unless Trump could get China, or Mexico, to pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Your attempt at sarcasm fails because it's obvious that you have zero knowledge on this topic.
China has been the #2 source of illegal immigrants to the US for a long long time, at least two decades. You're probably not an American, or you don't read American newspapers, or simply too young to have known this.... but it used to be very common to see headlines like,
"Cargo container seized at port of Long Beach found with fifty Chinese migrants living inside while being unloaded from cargo ship. Hazmat teams
Re: (Score:1)
The #2 source is Columbia
Re: MAGA (Score:1)
Then the chinese count as, let's say, australians or japanese, since they come through the Pacific.
Re: MAGA (Score:1)
If there is a Human Rights crisis in Columbia isn't the right choice for the refugees to find sancuary in Mexico? They would then be much closer to their families in their homeland and also in a land where the dominant language is the same. Why is Mexico shuttling these people across their country? Don't they want to help save the refugees?
Re: (Score:1)
And Columbia is both an economic and political problem, both caused by U.S. drug war effects.
Our problem comes to our door.
Re: (Score:2)
"The #2 source is Columbia"
BS.. Colombians have been too intelligent and with sufficient means to have the ability to outsource "the dirty" to the Mexicans since the early '90's.
Re: Chinese immigration (Score:5, Informative)
Spy Handler stated, in part:
China has been the #2 source of illegal immigrants to the US for a long long time, at least two decades. .... but it used to be very common to see headlines like,
"Cargo container seized at port of Long Beach found with fifty Chinese migrants living inside while being unloaded from cargo ship."
(Quote above edited to remove gratuitous xenophobia.)
The "#2" claim is bullshit - but the People's Republic is, in fact, a non-trivial source of unauthorized immigrants to the USA. According to the New York Times [nytimes.com], there are currently 268,000 of them here.
That number is dwarfed by the number of unauthorized immigrants from Mexico and Central and South America, but it's still more than the population of Newark, NJ (at least, as of the 2010 census). And China refuses to accept deportees, so we're basically stuck with them, even if the current administration manages to locate them all - which it won't, because it's focused exclusively on Hispanics.
It's also worth noting that Chinese immigrants, both authorized and unauthorized, tend to be younger, and have skills that are better-suited to the American job market, than the average Hispanic immigrant. They also tend not to arrive in shipping containers. Most of them arrive legally, on tourist visas - which they blithely overstay, because there's nowhere near the level of effort expended on tracking them down as there is on tracking down Hispanics.
In my experience (and I know several such Chinese), they tend to be highly entrepreneurial. The ones I know are engaged in smuggling consumer goods - not from China to the USA, but from the USA to China. (Levis 501's are hugely popular - and extremely costly - in China, for instance.) In a twisted way, you could say they're actually contributing to this country's economy, and doing a tiny bit to redress our trade imbalance with China.
In another way, you could say they're probably laundering money for the Chinese mob - and I'd bet a shiny, new, Ohio quarter you'd be right ...
Re: (Score:2)
I was in China recently and 501s were on sale in big chain shops at normal prices.
Re: (Score:2)
AmiMoJo noted:
I was in China recently and 501s were on sale in big chain shops at normal prices.
That's interesting. My next-door neighbor - who's married to a Chinese national - visits there fairly regularly. He's the one who informed me otherwise.
Are you sure the ones you saw were genuine Levis? After all, the counterfeiting of U.S. brands by Chinese companies is a perennial issue in trade negotiations, n'est ce pas ... ?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it depends where you go. In Guangzhou they were available, but not in Fuzhou.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure the ones you saw were genuine Levis?
Don't doubt it. Companies are generally happy to forgo some ridiculous markups in exchange for access to a wider market. It is the very definition of pricing what the market will bear.
I also remember the outrage in Australia a few years ago where a backpack company founded and based in Australia, manufactured in China sold backpacks in the USA for less than half the cost and with significantly higher expenses (import duties and longer shipping route). The answer to the outrage was simple: "I charge what I n
Re: (Score:2)
You have to see the big picture here.
I can see the big picture here; it's Trump voters who don't see the big picture. They rallied around the idea of "corruption" when in reality they were rallying against accountable government and due process. Especially due process which was somewhat keeping Trump's croniness in check. And now that Trump is out and out breaking the emoluments clause of the Constitution they refuse to see it. They just see that this hypocrisy is driving a little over 50% of the country crazy, and that's why they voted for hi
Re:MAGA (Score:4, Interesting)
Make America Great Again. That President Trump sure goes out of his way for the forgotten people of America.
What do you think going to happen to US agricultural sector when China inevitably retaliates for US torpedoing ZTE?
Re:MAGA (Score:4, Informative)
Make America Great Again. That President Trump sure goes out of his way for the forgotten people of America.
What do you think going to happen to US agricultural sector when China inevitably retaliates for US torpedoing ZTE?
Of course, this actually has nothing to do with the Trumped-up trade war with China. ZTE is in trouble with the US because they illegally shipped telco equipment to Iran and North Korea, broke US law and lied to the US Government. From Secretary Ross Announces Activation of ZTE Denial Order in Response to Repeated False Statements to the U.S. Government [commerce.gov]
In March 2017, ZTE agreed to a combined civil and criminal penalty and forfeiture of $1.19 billion after illegally shipping telecommunications equipment to Iran and North Korea, making false statements, and obstructing justice including through preventing disclosure to and affirmatively misleading the U.S. Government. In addition to these monetary penalties, ZTE also agreed a seven-year suspended denial of export privileges, which could be activated if any aspect of the agreement was not met and/or if the company committed additional violations of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR).
Now our President wants to let them off the hook because "reasons".
Re: (Score:3)
Do you think it would make any difference if China produces equally plausible-sounding excuse for retaliation on agricultural sector?
Re: (Score:3)
Do you think it would make any difference if China produces equally plausible-sounding excuse for retaliation on agricultural sector?
From a practical stand-point no, you're correct. Bu the ZTE sanctions have a legal, supportable basis, where the Trump trade war and tariff are just Trump stroking his ego and pandering to his base -- who will suffer China's targeted retaliation to the US agricultural sector. I have zero sympathy for them. They wanted and voted for this clown and they can reap what they sowed. (Be careful what you ask for, you may get it.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That and, I'm sure, this [businessinsider.com] helped change Trump's mind:
Trump's controversial ZTE order came days after the Chinese government provided millions to a Trump Organization-tied project
Within three days of the Chinese government agreeing to provide $500 million in loans to an Indonesian theme park that the Trump Organization has a deal to license President Donald Trump's name to, the president stunningly ordered sanctions be rescinded against a major Chinese telecom company.
Re: MAGA (Score:1)
Doesn't the Chinese populace still need to eat? I wasn't aware that the food China imports from the US was just a gesture they could stop performing.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you think going to happen to US agricultural sector when China inevitably retaliates for US torpedoing ZTE?
They'll get Congress to raise money and keep them millionaires via the Farm Bill.
Re:MAGA (Score:5, Informative)
Trump suddenly became concerned about all of these Chinese employees right after China made a big investment in one of his hotels.
"Meanwhile, the South China Morning Post reported last week that the Chinese government will provide $500 million in state loans to build MNC Lido City, a resort and theme park project in Indonesia that will include a golf course and hotels marked with the Trump name.
We have a new level of corruption.
Re: (Score:1)
and to think nearly-but-not-quite 50% of the voters in 2016 picked this fuckhole thinking he'd be different then, oh I don't know, how he's been his entire life
bunch of fucking idiots
Re: MAGA (Score:2)
He is at least a little different than many of the other scatological marvels in Washington. It seemed like enough of a different lever to pull for a lot of American voters that they did it. A lot of the loudest shrieking is even still coming from 'inside the beltway' which indicates actual progress.
What's with your scat obsession, btw? Is it trendy to be a potty mouth?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
and to think nearly-but-not-quite 50% of the voters in 2016 picked this fuckhole thinking he'd be different then, oh I don't know, how he's been his entire life
bunch of fucking idiots
Of course I blame most those who voted for this disaster. Fake news may have actually occurred but people had the ability to find the truth, if tried. I also blame those who didn't vote. They could have so easily stopped this, but they didn't.
Republicans at work bend themselves in pretzels while pretending they aren't to defend their vote. They believe, even now that Hillary was worse. I hate to say it but I think this being indoctrinated with a religion from youth seems to somehow allow them to just
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly was it that he wanted from ZTE and the Chinese?
To observe the Iranian sanctions.
How is it in the best interests of the USA to look the other way
What about bringing a huge international company to its knees and forcing a settlement with massive fines and firing of upper management seems like "looking the other way" to you?
All this had nothing whatsoever to with benefitting suppliers in the USA, and it is astonishing to think that anyone would believe that.
As someone who works at a company selling semiconductor equipment into the Chinese market, it's astonishing to me that anyone would believe otherwise.
but we're going to let China do that.
Exactly the opposite. We just demonstrated the capacity and will to hit a Chinese company very hard if they don't observe sanctions.
Re: (Score:2)
When I asked these question, it was NOT in reference to the penalties applied in 2016, 2017, and early 2018.
I am asking in reference to why did Trump REMOVE the sanction.
I agree that it becomes much easier to demonize Trump's actions when you ignore the history and only focus on one isolated incident.
From your own links:
2016: US forbids sale of US tech to ZTE without special exception. The ban was never enforced.
2017: US reaches settlement with ZTE for a $1.19 billion fine (though a later link of yours claims it was $900 million)
2018: US finds ZTE in breach of settlement, imposes total ban on sale of US technology. Company functionally shuts down.
This week: New settlement r
Re: (Score:2)
That we did back in 2016. What we are complaining about is Trump backing down from the 2016 agreement and penalties.
That's a strange recollection of events. The company was not following the 2016 agreement - Trump didn't "back down" from it. The final result is more severe than the original settlement.
. Maybe your company is so dependent that it would go out of business,
You misunderstand my concern. It's not that ZTE is a big customer - it is that all of the other foreign customers will limit their US exposure to avoid the same fate.
But Trump in 2018 backed down.
You either misunderstand the events that transpired or you are being deceptive.
Re: (Score:2)
I know all the cool kids won't invite you to their parties if you praise the idiot-in-chief for anything, but I fail to see the problem here. He played hardball and got what he wanted, and the outcome is in the best interests of the US. If you shut down the company completely, you risk putting other companies off of US suppliers in the long term. That may have been worth it if they hadn't capitulated - but they did capitulate.
What are you talking about? What is Trump getting out of letting a company who is violating trade sanctions to Iran and N. Korea, and has been found to be a security risk; to sell more products in the US?
Re: (Score:2)
What is he getting out of it? Everything we wanted! Massive fines and a complete turnover in management.
Meanwhile employes of Harley Davidson (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, the amount of open corruption and violations of the emoluments clause on display here is insane. And at the rate this guy is going he's on track to get reelected when the Dems run Hilary Bot 2.0 in 2020...
Re: (Score:2)
And at the rate this guy is going he's on track to get reelected when the Dems run Hilary Bot 2.0 in 2020...
The establishment does seem to think they can power another regular candidate through. There are signs of hope that the Democrat electorate actually gets it, though. In PA, the lieutenant governor's race was won by John Fetterman, who unseated the incumbent for the first time ever. In Kentucky, they chose Amy McGrath for House rep rather than the establishment candidate Jim Gray.
Re: Meanwhile employes of Harley Davidson (Score:1)
Hurdy-Gurdyson is dieing because millineals ride little inexpensive scooters. Not big rusting hunks that shed parts, drip oil, and cost more than a nicely equipped Scion.
This could be about American jobs (Score:4, Interesting)
ZTE was getting a lot of its components from American suppliers and the ban could have hurt those suppliers financially. Some may even have reduced their work forces if demand dropped. This probably also plays into Trump's plans to get China to buy more American products to reduce the trade deficit.
There's also the remote chance that Trump has money invested in those American suppliers. We'll probably never know.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the point though is Trump didn't give two shits about those suppliers - just how these tarrifs are going to screw over American farmers - especially soybean producers until $500 million in loans were in jeopardy for a hotel in Lido City.
Just ask yourself this - what if Obama did this?
Re: (Score:2)
We'll probably never know.
How could we not know? The honest Trump (unlike that crooked Hillary) promised to release his tax forms once we was given the nomination. Surely it's happened by now, right? right?
Re: (Score:2)
No. ZTE was getting a lot of its components from American companies. There are no American jobs at stake here. Have you heard of fabless semiconductor companies? That's what many American suppliers are. You own the IP, but manufacturing is done in China as it is. ZTE lost access to the IP, it was never about shipping actual American made stuff over to a Chinese supplier.
There's 500 Million Reasons Why (Score:1, Insightful)
Trump's announcement that he would be saving Chinese jobs came just days after China funded a Trump project in China, with half a billion dollars of that sweet, sweet cash.
One hand washes the other (Score:5, Informative)
This has absolutely nothing to do with the $500,000,000.00 that a Chinese government bank just poured into a failing Trump property in Indonesia.
http://www.businessinsider.com... [businessinsider.com]
No quid pro quo. You're the quid pro quo.
Re: (Score:3)
That's some strange math you have there. By my count, the bureaucracy took 12 days, since that's the amount of time from May 13th, when Trump told the Commerce Department to lift the sanctions, to May 25th, when the Commerce Department announced their plans for doing so.
The only things that happened during the three days you seem to be talking about are that the Chinese deposited a check, it cleared, and Trump found the time to announce (via Twitter, of course) a sudden and unexpected about-face with regard
Re: (Score:2)
My disagreement was with regards to the claim that the bureaucracy only took 3 days. I understand where the 3 days came from as a reference, and I also agree with your assessment about the potential dangers in giving the Chinese a reason to invest in their own chip tech, but the implication of those previous statements was clearly inaccurate.
Re:What's wrong with this? (Score:5, Informative)
They did pay a fine as part of the original settlement, and a moderately severe one, too. The Commerce Department's decision to ban them from buying American hardware and software was levied only after they failed to adhere to the terms of settlement, specifically, that several executives would be punished, fired, and receive no bonuses. They didn't follow up on punishing the executives, hence the ban.
It's not like this was a draconian move out of the blue - they were told ahead of time what the consequences would be for not doing what they agreed to do, and they did it anyway. I presume the assumption was that the Commerce Department wouldn't actually follow through with it, which turned out to be wrong.
'course, Trump's probably the most corrupt president we've ever had, so it turns out to have been a fine move by ZTE.
Re: (Score:2)
they were told ahead of time what the consequences would be for not doing what they agreed to do, and they did it anyway
Can you blame them? Look at what happened. No one cares about the Commerce Department when you have friends in all the right places.
Re: (Score:2)
"Why would we destroy ZTE over some small infraction rather than have them pay a fine?"
Because loss of the US market couldn't come close to destroying ZTE. And possibly because of their acknowledgment and payment of US based IP they've used on a world wide basis for years may be more profitable for us. And possibly to keep the market oscillating until election time.
Because we all know what will win the next election, not ideals, but our retirement account performances.
What Actually happed? (Score:1)
Which is it? (Score:2)
GOP/Trump are so wonderful (Score:2)