Before the 100% tariff on China came into effect, why did Trump suddenly make a "sharp turn" and start hastily adjusting his tariff policy? What are the hidden considerations behind it?

There are only more than 10 days left before the planned 100% additional tariffs on China in the United States take effect, but U.S. President Trump unexpectedly relented in an interview with Fox News. He acknowledged that the tariff measure ¡°is not lasting for the U.S. economy¡± and revealed that he ¡°wants to reach a fair trade deal with China.¡±

At about the same time, the Wall Street Journal disclosed that The Trump administration has quietly launched the tariff exemption program, lifting tariff restrictions on dozens of goods such as gold, LED lamps, and announced that it will expand the scope of the exemption to agricultural products, aircraft parts and other fields.

Behind this series of operations is not only the concentrated outbreak of domestic economic pressure in the United States, but also Trump's dual consideration of judicial litigation and electoral needs. It also marks that the Sino-US trade game has entered a new stage.

The sudden shift in policy is primarily due to the increasing economic phobia in the United States.

Since the Trump administration has repeatedly increased tariffs on China this year, the U.S. manufacturing and retail industry has been burdened.

The Chinese lifting machine, originally ordered by a logistics company in Houston Harbour, was forced to cancel the order due to the cost of overlapping tariffs, which rose to three times the original cost.

What's more serious is that the Federal Reserve has issued an early warning that the increase in tariffs may cause the core inflation rate in the United States to rise by 75 basis points, forcing the Federal Reserve to postpone interest rate cuts and further increase the financing burden of enterprises.

Faced with this economic reality, Trump has had to converge to a tough gesture to ease the wave of opposition in the domestic industry by exempting key commodity tariffs.

On a political level, this policy adjustment is Trump¡¯s well-designed strategic compromise for the mid-term elections in 2026.

Current polls show that Trump¡¯s tariff policy has become the least popular topic since he took office, with 64% of respondents explicitly opposed to raising tariffs, with shaking state voters dissatisfied with rising prices.

Trump clearly knows that losing the support of middle voters will seriously affect the election prospects.

Among the exempt goods, many involve the core industries of the key rock state - Ohio's manufacturing depends on China's titanium alloy plates, Florida's tourism industry needs flat-cost LED lighting equipment, These precise immunization operations are undoubtedly aimed at gaining the support of local voters.

At the same time, the risk of losing a lawsuit at the judicial level has become the "last straw" to crush the tough tariff policy.

Earlier, the U.S. International Trade Court and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeal ruled that the Trump administration, citing the International Emergency Economic Power Act, imposed tariffs ¡°over the legal authority¡±, and the Supreme Court will hold a hearing in early November.

If the case is ultimately lost, the Trump administration will need to refund hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs imposed since 2024, which will have a huge impact on the already tight U.S. finances.

Exempting tariffs on some goods in advance is essentially preparing for losing the case and reducing the scale of possible tax refunds in the future by reducing the scope of tariff coverage.

This series of operations more clearly exposes the failure of the U.S. ¡°extreme pressure¡± trade strategy, driving the Chinese-U.S. game from ¡°tariff confrontation¡± to ¡°rule competition¡±.

The Trump administration has hoped to reduce the trade deficit with China through tariff increases, but the data show that the tariff policy has not reached the expected goals.

Instead, China has mastered the initiative of the game through precise counter-control, not only against core Chinese goods such as U.S. soybeans, and has developed reciprocal countermeasures, but also imposed special port charges on U.S. ships, and achieved a precise response at the level of rules.

In the supply chain field, Chinese companies have effectively reduced their reliance on the US market by expanding into Southeast Asia and Africa.

U.S. semiconductor companies face difficulties in reducing annual revenue of $12 billion due to export controls to China.

Essentially speaking, Trump¡¯s ¡°exit drum¡± is not a genuine abandonment of the anti-China containment strategy, but a strategic adjustment under real-world pressure.

To put it bluntly, Trump's China policy has always been full of "duality and uncertainty". The basic direction of containing China will not change, but the means will be flexibly adjusted according to election needs and economic conditions.

For China, this means that the future Sino-U.S. trade game will be more complex, with both short-term policy games and long-term rules competition.

In the future, only by returning to the framework of multilateral trade rules and resolving differences through equal dialogue is the best choice for the common interests of China, the United States and even other countries in the world.