Presidential candidate Donald Trump invited Chinese electric carmakers to enter the US market—as long as they made the China-designed cars in America.
This would be a stark contrast to the Biden-Harris system of keeping the popular clean-energy cars out of the country by slapping a 100 per cent surcharge on them.
BANKERS INTRIGUED
The Trump plan has investment bankers intrigued.
"If acted upon, this would be a revolutionary change in the US-China trade relationship," said Marko Papic Chief Strategist at BCA Research.
"First, it would separate national security concerns from trade, adjusting US trade policy to the realities of a global multipolar environment. Second, it would resolve the trade dispute using tried and tested policies from the 1980s."
The strategist was referring to a period when Japan was the world's leading carmaker and was coerced into building its vehicles on US soil.
INVITATION INCLUDES THREAT
Trump has repeated the offer to Chinese carmakers several times, although it has had little coverage in the mainstream media, since it doesn't fit the narrative.
In March this year, he said: “If they want to build a plant in Michigan, in Ohio, in South Carolina, they can, using American workers, they can."
The offer was repeated last month in a convention speech, but in keeping with his tough guy image, a threat was included. "We don’t mind it happening but plants will be built in the United States and our people are going to man those plants. And if they don’t agree with us, we’ll put a tariff of approximately 100 to 200 percent on each car and they will be unsellable in the United States."
US CAR MAKERS NEED CHINA I.P.
Of course, all politicians make promises that fail to turn into actions. Yet Trump has made this offer repeatedly, and the electric car issue is not going to go away, so something will have to be done about it. Geely, BYD, Chery and other Chinese firms are enjoying remarkable sales growth in multiple countries.
There would be other advantages too, including IP transfer from China to the United States carmakers: In America, Tesla is over-dominant (51% of the electric market) and the Big Three car firms (13% between them) do need some creative input.
Would China consider accepting the deal? Probably yes. It has shown repeatedly that making trade deals overseas is the country's superpower.
WAY OUT OF TOXIC POLITICS
But more importantly, the offer shines a light on an unexamined difference between the two political parties in the United States.
The hyper-politicized Biden-Harris administration is controlled by the security establishment (call it the blob or the swamp or whatever), which gives an insanely paranoid military-intelligence quadrant the final yea or nay to every deal involving China.
Trump, for all his faults, is showing that a business deal can be handled as a business deal. This is something that China, and indeed all of Asia, can understand.
Trade is often beneficial, while US geo-politics is now always toxic.
Yet the Chinese should not make the mistake of thinking that Trump is friendly towards them. In the same speech that he invited them to build factories in the United States, Trump said: "If you go back 20, 25 years they’ve stolen, going to China and Mexico, about 68 percent of our auto industry. Manufacturing jobs. We’re going to get them all back. We’re going to get them all back, every single one of them."
His motivation sounds less like a hope for a win-win deal, and more like revenge.
by Nury Vittachi
Lai See(利是)
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Dr. Celeste Lo (Solicitor (Hong Kong), Greater Bay Area Lawyer (PRC), Postdoc Fellow at the School of Law of City University of Hong Kong)
With the release of its latest White Paper, Hong Kong: Safeguarding China’s National Security Under the Framework of One Country, Two Systems, China’s State Council has delineated a comprehensive blueprint for the metropolis’s future. Issued in February 2026, the document provides a granular retrospective on the implementation of the Hong Kong National Security Law and the recently enacted national security laws. Far exceeding a mere policy review, the White Paper serves as a definitive pronouncement on the recalibrated constitutional nexus between the Central Authorities and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, firmly establishing national security as the indispensable bedrock of Hong Kong’s enduring prosperity.
The central thesis of the White Paper is unambiguous: security and development are not competing interests, but symbiotic imperatives. The document contextualizes the severe turbulence of 2019 not merely as a localized political dispute, but as an existential vulnerability that challenged the sovereign integrity of the state. From Beijing’s perspective, the ensuing legislative interventions were constitutional necessities, urgently required to seal long-standing statutory loopholes. By restoring social equilibrium and erecting a formidable security architecture, the White Paper contends that the central government has successfully safeguarded the “One Country, Two Systems” framework, insulating it against external subversion and internal destabilization.
A substantial portion of the White Paper is devoted to elucidating the institutional refinement of Hong Kong’s governance apparatus. At the heart of this transformation is the fundamental principle of “patriots administering Hong Kong.” The White Paper details how the reformed electoral framework ensures that the city’s executive and legislative branches remain harmonized to align with the broader national interests. This alignment is championed as a vital corrective to overcome historical political deadlocks, thereby cultivating an efficient, executive-led administration uniquely equipped to resolve entrenched socioeconomic challenges. According to the White Paper, this high-caliber, orderly governance paradigm supersedes partisan gridlock with constructive policy formulation, ultimately advancing the tangible wellbeing of the city’s 7.5 million residents.
Equally salient is the White Paper’s sophisticated overture to global capital. Recognizing Hong Kong’s irreplaceable role as a conduit between the Chinese mainland and the global economy, the White Paper introduces the nuanced concept of “open security”. The document marshals an array of compelling economic indicators, surging GDP growth, premier global IPO rankings, and a proliferation of family offices, to illustrate that capital flourishes within a secure, predictable ecosystem. The central government reaffirms its steadfast commitment to preserving Hong Kong’s distinct institutional advantages, notably its esteemed common law jurisprudence, its enduring status as a free port, and the unimpeded circulation of international capital and data.
Ultimately, the White Paper cements a resilient paradigm for Hong Kong. It explicitly asserts that the “highest principle” underpinning the “One Country, Two Systems” policy is the absolute safeguarding of national sovereignty, security, and developmental interests. Within this recalibrated architecture, the contours of the “Two Systems” are precisely demarcated and robustly shielded by the overarching strength of the “One Country”. By projecting a vision wherein ironclad legal safeguards precipitate an open, dynamic, and globally integrated business ecosystem, the White Paper charts a confident vision for Hong Kong to navigate an increasingly complex global landscape with renewed stability and vigour.
