U.S. President Donald Trump, looking to pressure China to speed up talks on a new trade agreement, says that starting Friday he will impose sharply higher tariffs on billions of dollars of Chinese exports to the United States.

Trump said Sunday on Twitter, “For 10 months, China has been paying Tariffs to the USA of 25% on 50 Billion Dollars of High Tech, and 10% on 200 Billion Dollars of other goods. These payments are partially responsible for our great economic results.”

He said, “The 10% will go up to 25% on Friday. 325 Billions Dollars of additional goods sent to us by China remain untaxed, but will be shortly, at a rate of 25%. The Tariffs paid to the USA have had little impact on product cost, mostly borne by China. The Trade Deal with China continues, but too slowly, as they attempt to renegotiate. No!” 

There was no immediate reaction from China about Trump’s announcement.

Washington and Beijing have engaged in reciprocal tariff hikes over the last year while negotiators have engaged in lengthy trade talks, alternating negotiations between the two capitals. Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping had agreed last December to forestall new tariffs while the talks were going on, but it was not clear how Trump’s announcement would affect the negotiations, set to resume in Washington on Wednesday.

Despite an initial goal of finishing by March 1, the two countries have continued to debate several issues, but have yet to complete a deal. Both sides, representing the world’s two biggest economies, have said progress is being made.

The two countries have been trying to resolve disputes over intellectual property theft and forced technology transfers. It is not clear whether the tariffs both countries have imposed will remain in place if an agreement is reached.

U.S. employers added a robust 263,000 jobs in April, suggesting that businesses have shrugged off earlier concerns that the economy might slow this year and anticipate strong customer demand.

The unemployment rate fell to a five-decade low of 3.6% from 3.8%, though that drop partly reflected an increase in the number of Americans who stopped looking for work. Average hourly pay rose 3.2% from 12 months earlier, a healthy increase though unchanged from the previous month.

Friday’s jobs report from the Labor Department showed that solid economic growth is still encouraging strong hiring nearly a decade into the economy’s recovery from the Great Recession. The economic expansion is set to become the longest in history in July.

Many businesses say they are struggling to find workers. Some have taken a range of steps to fill jobs, including training more entry-level workers, loosening educational requirements and raising pay.

The brightening picture represents a sharp improvement from the start of the year. At the time, the government was enduring a partial shutdown, the stock market had plunged, trade tensions between the United States and China were flaring and the Federal Reserve had just raised short-term interest rates in December for a fourth time in 2018. Analysts worried that the economy might barely expand in the first three months of the year.

Yet the outlook soon brightened. Chair Jerome Powell signaled that the Fed would put rate hikes on hold. Trade negotiations between the U.S. and China made some progress. The economic outlook in some other major economies improved. Share prices rebounded.

And in the end, the government reported that the U.S. economy grew at a 3.2% annual rate in the January-March period — the strongest pace for a first quarter since 2015. That said, the growth was led mostly by factors that could prove temporary — a restocking of inventories in warehouses and on store shelves and a narrowing of the U.S. trade deficit. By contrast, consumer spending and business investment, which more closely reflect the economy’s underlying strength, were relatively weak.

Yet American households have become more confident since the winter and are ramping up their spending. Consumer spending surged in March by the most in nearly a decade. A likely factor is that steady job growth and solid wage increases have enlarged Americans’ paychecks.

Businesses are also spending more freely. Orders to U.S. factories for long-lasting capital goods jumped in March by the most in eight months. That suggested that companies were buying more computers, machinery and other equipment to keep up with growing customer demand.

Housing, too, is rebounding after home sales had slumped in the second half of last year. Mortgage rates rose to nearly 5% last fall as the Fed raised interest rates. With the Fed now putting rate hikes on hold, borrowing costs have declined.

In February, sales of existing homes jumped by the most in three years. And in March, more Americans signed contracts to buy a house. Contract signings usually lead to finished sales one to two months later.

A White House meeting between the current U.S. president and a prominent businessman who is seeking to become president of Taiwan is causing concern. 

The White House on Thursday sought to downplay any diplomatic or political sensitivities, saying President Donald Trump and Foxconn founder Terry Gou did not discuss support for the billionaire’s presidential campaign in Taiwan. 

“He is just a great friend” of Trump, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement. 

The Taiwanese businessman, however, in a Facebook posting after Wednesday’s meeting and in a discussion with reporters, said he told the president of his candidacy and Trump responded that being president “was a tough job.” 

He also displayed a pen and autographed coin he said that Trump gave him.

“If I am elected president of the Republic of China, I will be a peacemaker and won’t become a troublemaker,” Gou told reporters. “I will strengthen Taiwan and the U.S. economically.” He also boasted that of all the presidential contenders, he is the only one to have secured an Oval Office meeting. 

Wednesday’s discussion is the first known circumstance of a sitting American president meeting with a Taiwanese presidential candidate since Washington broke diplomatic ties with Taipei in 1979 as part of its recognition of the communist government in Beijing. 

Gou is to seek the nomination of the opposition Kuomintang party in Taiwan’s 2020 presidential election. The party is regarded as having a friendlier stance toward Beijing than the ruling Democrat Progressive Party of President Tsai Ing-wen. 

Trump also was seen as breaking protocol as president-elect when he had a phone conversation with Tsai, something that prompted protest from the Chinese government, which regards Taiwan as a renegade island province. 

The Trump-Gou meeting occurred at a particularly sensitive time. The United States is in the final stages of negotiating a sweeping trade deal with China amid growing strategic tension between the two Pacific powers. 

Meanwhile, Gou — who has appeared in public previously alongside Trump to tout economic investment — is receiving criticism in the U.S. state of Wisconsin because what was envisioned as a $10 billion liquid crystal display factory project has fallen behind schedule. 

“Mr. Gou is spending a lot of money in Wisconsin and soon will announce even more investment there,” the White House press secretary said in her statement. 

Foxconn, which is a major supplier for Apple Inc. products, says Gou and Trump discussed the “positive progress of the Wisconn Valley Science and Technology Park project and other matters.” 

Trump, a strong supporter of the project in the political swing state, has proclaimed it the “eighth wonder of the world” for its scope and its projected economic impact, including as many as 13,000 jobs. 

There is concern about whether it will become a reality as envisioned because Foxconn failed to meet its job targets in 2018 to qualify for state tax credits and it has reduced the size of the factory it originally announced it would construct. 

Gou, speaking to reporters on Wednesday, disputed that anything significant has changed. 

“It is not right to say our investment in Wisconsin has changed,” he said. “We suspended the work around October and November last year because the weather there was snowy and icy cold. We will continue our work in May when the weather gets warmer.”

Gou on Thursday flew to Wisconsin on his private jet and met with Gov. Tony Evers at an airport terminal to further try to allay concerns about the project. 

Evers earlier told reporters he would emphasize to Gou that there must be adequate protections for taxpayers and environmental standards. 

The Nasdaq is adding fake meat to its diet.

Beyond Meat, the purveyor of plant-based burgers and sausages, made its debut on the stock exchange Thursday. It’s the first pure-play maker of vegan “meat” to go public, according to Renaissance Capital, which researches and tracks IPOs.

Beyond Meat raised about $240 million selling 9.6 million shares at $25 each. That values the company at about $1.5 billion.

The 10-year-old company has attracted celebrity investors like Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and actor Leonardo DiCaprio and buzz for placing its products in burger joints like Carl’s Jr. It sells to 30,000 grocery stores, restaurants and schools in the U.S., Canada, Italy, the United Kingdom and Israel.

Beyond Meat CEO Ethan Brown said the IPO timing is right because the company wants to expand overseas. He also wants consumers to be able to buy shares since they have fueled the company’s growth.

“It really is a wonderful feeling to be able to welcome people in who have helped this brand,” Brown told The Associated Press.

Still, Beyond Meat has never made an annual profit; it lost $30 million last year. It’s also facing serious competition from other “new meat” companies like Impossible Foods and traditional players like Tyson Foods Inc. Tyson recently sold a stake in Beyond Meat because it plans to develop its own alternative meat.

The IPO comes amid growing consumer interest in plant-based foods for their presumed health and environmental benefits. U.S. sales of plant-based meats jumped 42% between March 2016 and March 2019 to a total of $888 million, according to Nielsen. Traditional meat sales rose 1% to $85 billion in that same time frame.

The trend is a global one. U.K. sales of meat alternatives jumped 18% over the last year, while sales of traditional meat and poultry slid 2%.

Even Burger King has recognized the appeal. Earlier this week, the fast food chain announced that it would start testing the Impossible Whopper, made with a plant-based burger from Impossible Foods, in additional markets after its monthlong test in St. Louis proved successful.

Brown says Beyond Meat’s ingredient list — it only uses natural ingredients that haven’t been genetically modified and doesn’t use soy — sets it apart from competitors. Its products are made from pea protein, canola oil, potato starch and other plant-based ingredients. Its burgers “bleed” with beet juice; its sausages are colored with fruit juice.

Unlike competitors, Beyond Meat products have also been sold in the meat section of groceries since 2016. That has broadened their appeal beyond vegetarians. Beyond Meat says a 26-week study last spring showed that 93% of Kroger customers who bought its burgers also bought animal meat during the same period.

Health comparisons are mixed. A four-ounce 92% lean burger from Laura’s Lean Beef has higher fat and cholesterol than a Beyond Meat burger, but Beyond Meat’s burger has higher sodium and carbohydrates and slightly less protein. The lean beef burger is 160 calories; a Beyond Meat burger is 270 calories.

Brown says Beyond Meat is working on reducing sodium, which is a natural byproduct of its manufacturing process. But he also points out that red meat and processed meat have been classified as possible carcinogens by the World Health Organization.

Beyond Meat also costs more. For $5.99, consumers can get two 4-ounce patties of Beyond Burger or four 4-ounce patties of Laura’s Lean Beef.

Brown said Beyond Meat has a five-year goal of getting at least one product — most likely beef — to cost less than the animal version. He expects the supply chain will grow as sales expand, which will lower the cost of raw ingredients like peas.

But Beyond Meat touts environmental benefits as well. The company says a plant-based burger takes 99% less water and 93% less land to produce than a beef burger, and generates 90% fewer greenhouse gas emissions.

Beyond Meat was founded in 2009 by Brown, a former clean energy executive. Brown’s family part-owned a Maryland dairy farm, so as a child, Brown spent weekends and summers on the farm. As he grew older, he began to question whether people really needed animals to produce meat.

Brown teamed up with two professors from the University of Missouri, Fu-hung Hsieh and Harold Huff, who had been developing soy-based chicken since the 1980s. By 2013, Beyond Meat was selling plant-based chicken strips nationwide at Whole Foods. (The company discontinued chicken earlier this year but says it’s working on a better recipe.)

For investors, the stock is not without risk. Amid its annual losses, Beyond Meat must also continue to spend heavily on research and development. The El Segundo, California-based company employs 63 scientists, engineers, researchers, technicians and chefs at its 30,000-square-foot lab. It also has manufacturing facilities in Columbia, Missouri.

Renaissance Capital, which has researched the company, says investors will likely tolerate the losses because the business is growing so quickly. Beyond Meat’s net revenue was $87.9 million last year, 170% higher than 2017.

In documents filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Beyond Meat says it will invest $40 million to $50 million in current and new manufacturing facilities and spend $50 million to $60 million on product development and sales. The rest will be used to pay down debt and fund operations.

President Donald Trump is increasingly reliant upon economic sanctions to achieve his foreign policy goals, despite a repeated emphasis that the use of military force remains a viable option.  However, these coercive measures, analysts say, have not produced their intended results, and at times have put the United States at odds with allies.  

Venezuela

In the case of Venezuela, the Trump sanctions that include the seizure of Venezuela’s oil assets in the United States, along with joining more than 50 other countries in recognizing Juan Guaido, the head of the National Assembly, as the interim president, have energized the opposition.  Despite the economic pain caused by the sanctions, the massive protests in the country, and reports of growing mid-level military support for the opposition, socialist leader Nicolas Maduro has continued to hold on to power through increasing political repression.

Short of using military force that could entangle the United States in a protracted civil war, there are few other measures the Trump administration can take to force democratic change in Venezuela.

“Because the costs are limited to us.  It also means the benefits will likely be limited.  We could accept more costs and achieve more benefits if we were for example, to invade these countries, change their governments, force them to adopt policies we want,” said Richard Weitz, a political-military analysis at Hudson Institute in Washington, DC.

Iran

Trump has more aggressively imposed unilateral sanctions than past presidents against countries like Venezuela, Iran, Cuba and North Korea, and in threatening to target more third party countries that violate U.S. restrictions.

“He’s following the thesis that, you know, began to be articulated in the Congress and in the 90s, which is you should force other countries to make a choice.  They can do business with us, or they can do business with Iran, or Cuba, North Korea,” said William Reinsch, an international business analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC.

After withdrawing from the Iranian nuclear deal, negotiated by the previous administration of President Barack Obama, Trump’s security team recently warned third party countries, including allies South Korea and Japan, of impending sanctions if they continue to buy Iranian oil.

The unilateral sanctions have worked to some degree to force reluctant allies to go along with increasing economic pressure on the Iranian Islamic Republic to end its nuclear ambitions and support of armed militant groups in the Middle East.

“They’ve reassured allies in the Middle East that we’re taking a strong stand in Iran, they have caused European countries to disengage from the Iranian economy, even as their governments, although they are clearly opposed to his policies, they haven’t taken strong measures to confront the U.S. on that,” said Weitz.

Cuba

Trump on Wednesday threatened an economic embargo of Cuba for allegedly supporting Maduro in Venezuela with 20,000 troops.  The United States also recently announced it would enforce sanctions against Cuba permitting U.S. businesses that had property seized by the communist government of Fidel Castro 60 years ago, to sue international companies, some in Europe and Canada, that have since taken over these buildings.

These restrictions on Cuba and Iran not only potentially target allies that violate U.S. policy, they could also hurt American businesses by excluding them from these markets.

“The worst case for American companies is if they’re out, and the German, French, British competitors are in, because then they’re losing market share, and they’re losing market share long term, because they’re not going to get that back when the political situation changes,” said Reinsch.

North Korea

On North Korea the Trump administration led efforts for increased United Nations sanctions in 2017 that ban most of that country’s exports, along with unilateral sanctions on companies in China and Russia for supporting the North’s weapons program.  These restrictions likely contributed to Pyongyang suspending ballistic missile and nuclear tests and agreeing to engage in denuclearization talks.  However, the talks remain deadlocked over Washington’s demand for Pyongyang’s near complete disarmament prior to sanctions relief.

While sanctions can impose increased economic costs on an adversary country, analysts are skeptical they can force sweeping change, and say that over time these measures can become less effective as targeted countries step up evasion efforts.  

President Donald Trump is increasingly reliant upon economic sanctions to achieve his foreign policy goals, even as he also asserts that the use of military force is a viable option. However, as VOA’s Brian Padden reports, in three key countries subjected to sanctions Trump’s approach so far hasn’t produced the intended results and at times has put the U.S. at odds with allies.