At the end of September, the U.S. Department of Commerce suddenly issued a new regulation, which appeared to be an update to export control operations, but actually came to a "pot end" for Chinese companies.
The core meaning of this new rule is simple: as long as a Chinese company is included in the U.S. regulatory list, its subsidiaries, whether or not directly involved in the relevant business, as long as the shareholding ratio exceeds half, are considered a group.
This is not enough, even those companies that are just a little bit side-by-side, should be specially reviewed.This practice is not only restricted, but more like a "trap" for Chinese enterprises.
An unreasonable “sanction.”
This time the rules change, say adjustment, in fact, the underlying logic is clear, is to block all possible roads by China.
This new regulation by the U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security directly extends the logic of previous sanctions on the parent company to its subsidiaries and affiliates. That is, as soon as a Chinese company is named, its subsidiary is difficult to hide, and how to explain "independent legal persons" is useless.
Moreover, even if the stock structure is more complex, the U.S. side must give you clear evidence, otherwise you are a venture capital enterprise.
This way of operating, in fact, violates the rules originally recognized in international commerce.
According to the past practice, which company has a problem, it is targeted to deal with it, and the subsidiary as long as it is not directly involved in sensitive business, the daily operation can be carried out as usual.
But now the United States no longer plays like this and has directly embarked on the path of "sitting together". This is like lifting a big stone in the business field, and whoever approaches will suffer, making investors and partners scared.
What makes people feel even more meaningful is that such rule changes are not temporary at all. The Trump administration's China policy has always been highly strategic.
From the beginning of his first term, he has been constantly pressuring Chinese technology enterprises in various ways, from high-end chips to communications equipment, from equipment exports to talent flows, and almost every key point has been brought to the article.
Of course, the United States still said the same thing, saying that it was for "national security" and worried that China might use American technology to develop military capabilities.
However, it is not surprising that such a claim has long been heard internationally.Because everyone can see, this practice has gone far beyond the scope of reasonable prevention, rather than as an excuse for national security, to engage in economic repression.
To put it bluntly, we just don't want China to make any breakthroughs in core technology fields, even if this blockade is logically untenable.
From point to point strike to total blockade.
The most prominent change in the Trump administration's approach compared to the past is that the means are wider, the goals are harsher, and the scope is larger.
In the past, certain companies were attacked on a point-to-point basis. For example, if they were suspected of having problems, firepower would be concentrated on them. But now the model has changed, and it has begun to "cast the net to catch people". As long as you have any relationship with the named company, whether it is a subsidiary, affiliated company or partner, you will all be dragged in and screened.
This control method makes normal business relations look like a "joint sitting method". In the past, the equity structure and cooperation model between companies were complex, but now they are divided into "innocent" and "suspected" across the board, which undoubtedly increases the legal and compliance burden of all foreign companies that have dealings with China companies.
It's not that many enterprises don't want to do business, but they are worried that they will be "recruited" accidentally, so they simply choose to wait and see or even withdraw their capital.
This is precisely the effect that the US wants. It is not only to seal the technology sources of Chinese enterprises, but also to create a "chilling effect"-so that everyone is afraid to contact Chinese enterprises, provide equipment, transfer technology, or even do the most basic business dealings.
In this way, Chinese companies, even if they are not named, will fall into isolation because of the chain of cooperation being cut off.
But can this really work out in the imagination? to be honest, in the short term, it will do a lot of impact.Many Chinese companies need to re-evaluate their overseas strategy, and some of the plans that had intended to expand the international market may also be forced to stop.
But in the long run, this repression will not necessarily the purpose of the U.S. because Chinese enterprises have gone through several rounds of harsher blockade, and each time did not fall, instead inspired more self-development.
China's response is tough, and global supply chains are also shaking
In the face of this set of operations by the United States, the Chinese side did not remain silent.The Chinese Ministry of Commerce quickly responded, saying it was very direct, pointing out that the behavior of the United States has seriously damaged the normal rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, and also disrupted the global trade order.
More importantly, China has made it clear that it will take appropriate measures to protect its own interests when necessary.
This response is not surprising.In recent years, China has accumulated a lot of experience in responding to the U.S. blockade.In the field of semiconductors, for example, the U.S. has taken action, and China has immediately strengthened controls on key metal exports.
This “reciprocal counter” strategy is both accurate and deterrent, and this time, if the US continues to crazyly add to the scope of control, it does not rule out that China will adopt a stricter export policy in areas such as rare earth and critical minerals.
Resources such as rare earth are widely used in a number of high-end industries such as military, aviation, and communications, while China is one of the world’s major suppliers.
If China really starts to tighten these exports, then the industrial chain in the United States will also tighten, and it will not be so easy to make up for it.
More realistically, the U.S. policy also makes it difficult for its own.Many U.S. companies and China have long-term and stable partnerships, and this compliance pressure increases once it forces them to choose between politics and interests.
Especially some small and medium-sized technology companies, have no resources to engage in such a complex compliance process, and ultimately can only choose to withdraw.
The broader impact, in fact, has emerged globally.The companies of Europe, Japan, and South Korea, these traditional allies, are also beginning to feel unhappy about U.S. policy.On the one hand, they do not want to follow the U.S. too far, and on the other hand, they do not dare to violate the will of the U.S.
This dilemma is pushing the global technology industry chain into an uncertain reorganization. The international division of labor, which originally exchanged needed goods, is now becoming more and more fragmented because of the policies of one country.
This trend, if continued, is not only unfavourable for China, but also for the world. Because in today’s highly connected era, no one can be separated from anyone. Technology can not be broken by blockade, but the more repressed, the easier it is to inspire the autonomous momentum of the blockade party.
China’s path over the years has illustrated this: external pressure is reality, but what really determines destiny is its own ability and resilience.
Blockade is an obstacle, not the end.
The Trump administration's "side-by-side" export control may seem aggressive, but the extent to which it will work remains a question mark. In history, there has never been a technological blockade that completely prevented the rise of a country. On the contrary, it has often become a catalyst for accelerating transformation.
China's scientific and technological development will not be stalled because of a ban. On the contrary, it will find new paths under pressure and force new breakthroughs under blockade.
From chips to electric vehicles, from communications to artificial intelligence, China’s industrial system is gradually getting rid of external dependence.
More importantly, this unwavering approach has led more and more countries to reflect: should we leave a space for independent policy judgment for ourselves?
This time the scientific and technological strength between China and the United States is not only the difference between the two countries, but also a major examination of the global industrial chain trust system.
U.S. issued export control transparency rules, research agencies: will affect several Chinese subsidiaries — 2025-09-30 11:38; Observer Network