The US Treasury secretary says China’s $1.2 trillion trade surplus is unsustainable, although the G20 has not approved coordinated restrictions
US asks G20 members to review trade with China
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has urged G20 countries to reconsider their terms of trade with China and examine measures that could reduce global trade imbalances. He made the comments ahead of a meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors in Asheville, North Carolina.
Bessent argues that China’s current growth model, which relies heavily on exports while domestic consumption remains comparatively weak, is becoming unsustainable for other markets.
“The rest of the world is going to have to examine their terms of trade with China,” Scott Bessent said
The Treasury secretary did not present an agreed list of new restrictions. His remarks represent a political call for G20 members to review their national trade regimes and consider defensive instruments where necessary. No collective decision on additional tariffs, quotas or other barriers has been adopted.
China’s surplus reaches $1.2 trillion
Bessent based his argument on the scale of China’s trade surplus, which he put at $1.2 trillion. He believes weak domestic demand is encouraging Chinese manufacturers to sell increasing volumes of goods abroad.
“The world cannot have a China with a $1.2 trillion trade surplus. In China, the economy is quite weak, and they are trying to export their way out of it, and they need to rebalance their economy,” Bessent told Reuters
Washington wants Beijing to stimulate domestic consumption and reduce its dependence on overseas demand. The United States is also seeking language on trade and current-account imbalances in a joint G20 statement.
Such wording would require agreement among all members, including China. As of 1 September 2026, the G20 had not adopted a collective decision to introduce coordinated trade barriers against Chinese goods.
US restrictions redirected Chinese exports
The United States has already imposed high tariffs on many categories of Chinese goods and restricted imports of certain products, including vehicles. These measures reduced direct Chinese shipments to the US market but also redirected exports elsewhere.
Chinese manufacturers have expanded sales in Europe, Latin America, Southeast Asia and other regions. Economies that did not impose comparable restrictions have consequently faced stronger competition from Chinese industrial goods.
Bessent says he previously warned other advanced economies about this effect. In his view, they must now decide whether to maintain existing market-access conditions or introduce additional defensive measures.
Governments could choose different instruments
Bessent did not specify which tools G20 members should use. Possible measures could include higher import duties, anti-dumping investigations, countervailing duties on subsidised products, quotas or additional technical requirements.
The use of these instruments would depend on national legislation and countries’ obligations under World Trade Organization rules. Even if G20 members agree that imbalances need to be reduced, they would not necessarily impose identical tariffs.
The European Union, the United States and other economies may target different goods and use separate legal procedures. Electric vehicles, batteries, solar panels, steel and industrial equipment are among the sectors most likely to face scrutiny because governments have already raised concerns about subsidies and excess production capacity.
Logistics networks could become more complex
Additional trade barriers could change cargo flows between China and the world’s largest consumer markets. If tariffs make direct imports less competitive, companies may move final manufacturing stages to third countries or change their sourcing geography.
For logistics operators, this would create longer and more complicated routes and customs procedures. Instead of travelling directly from a Chinese port, goods might pass through a production facility in Southeast Asia, Mexico, Türkiye or another market.
Customs authorities are also likely to intensify origin checks. They will examine where products were genuinely manufactured and whether third countries are being used to circumvent tariffs. Importers would need more detailed records covering suppliers, components and manufacturing processes.
Changing trade conditions could also affect the distribution of container volumes among shipping lines, ports and warehouses. Companies often accelerate imports before new tariffs take effect, creating short-term demand peaks. After implementation, volumes on affected routes may decline and containers may have to be repositioned toward alternative markets.
Businesses need to prepare for several scenarios
Bessent’s statement does not mean that G20 countries will immediately impose new duties. Carriers and cargo owners should distinguish the US proposal from measures that have already completed the legislative process.
Nevertheless, the discussion points to further fragmentation of global trade. Companies dependent on Chinese goods will need to assess not only product and freight costs but also the risk of additional duties, origin-verification delays and changing customs requirements.
Supplier diversification can improve resilience, but it may also increase the number of routes, warehouse operations and commercial agreements that companies must manage. For logistics providers, this will strengthen demand for customs expertise, regulatory monitoring and the ability to redirect cargo rapidly between markets.
Read also: China’s Tariff Reform Opens New Markets for African Goods
