Campaign rhetoric on China becomes a "Tariffs Thursday" reality

The Trump administration is set to unveil a package of punishing measures just after high-noon today all aimed at China, including billions in new import tariffs (or better put - consumer taxes). 

The White House is seeking to clamp down on what it says are improper Chinese trade practices and lax intellectual property rights by making it significantly more difficult for China’s companies to acquire advanced American technology or invest in American companies. 

Few disagree on both sides of the Pacific that Beijing needs to do more to open its markets to foreign competition, improve intellectual property protection, and provide a level playing field for all businesses operating in the Middle Kingdom.

The disagreement is in how this all happens.

It is still unclear how a strategy of using tariffs will move the needle. 

Not only will the American consumer feel the burden with fewer funds to spend, but companies operating with long-term vision also now need to create a new playbook,

MBA 101 tip, for companies to be successful, they need predictability and want to see problems fixed productively without friction. 

Think solutions, not sanctions.

For me, it’s just not clear how tariffs get you to fix these problems.

Listed on the official White House schedule as "THE PRESIDENT signs a Presidential Memorandum targeting China’s economic aggression," this memo will change global business in ways unknown but known is in the fact that power of multinational corporations has peaked and the future American elections will never be the same.

Even with just hours to go, final details of Trump's plan, including the number of imports to be hit by tariffs, remain in flux and full of Twittersphere speculation.

Since Trump will just be singing a memo today, the tariffs won’t be imposed immediately, giving American business, lobbyists, and special interests an opportunity to comment and suggest which products should be subject to the duties. James Madison's faction theory will be in full effect in the nation's capital.

Trump’s metals tariffs are already taxing patience. The LAT reports, the Trump administration’s tariffs on imported steel and aluminum are set to take effect Friday, but the rollout is being criticized as confusing, rushed, and potentially crisis-inducing. Have fun dropping off products at the Port of Los Angeles next week, next month, next year.

Whatever the final details become, this issue will linger for years.

Not only do companies now face a two-sided problem of needing to engage both Beijing and DC in respected fashions, but it is hard to see how this action doesn't shape the 2018 and 2020 elections - being tough on China makes American voters feel good. 

Also, be mindful that as the CW inside the beltway is all focused on US-China commercial relations, Brussels has a say as well.

As Trump makes "Ameican First" moves, the Europen Union is holding firm in the background. This memo will undoubtedly strengthen the EU. As the biggest trading block in the world, they can flex their power and be more selective, stable, and secure - all attributes global business likes.

Enjoy the ride.

Marc A. Ross is the founder of Caracal Global and specializes in global communications and thought leader management at the intersection of politics, policy, and profits. Working with boardrooms and C-Suite executives from multinational corporations, trade associations, and disruptive startups, Marc helps leaders create compelling communications, focused content, and winning commerce.

Term limits: Who needs them?

This weekend some 3,000 delegates gathered in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing as part of the National People’s Congress (NPC). The NPC is China's annual rubber-stamp national legislature under strict control of the Chinese Communist Party.

The NPC voted almost unanimously to approve an amendment to China's constitution to abolish the term limit on the presidency, opening the way for Xi Jinping to rule indefinitely.

With a vote of 2,958 votes in favor, two against, three abstentions and one invalid ballot, the 35-year-old line in China's governing document limiting the president to two consecutive terms was removed.

A few thoughts on this move to consider:

There is no President in China: In the must-read book The Party by Richard McGregor, he goes to great lengths to explain there is no "President" in China. It is a word that has been hijacked by the Chinese Communist Party to appease Western diplomats and soften how foreigners see the rulers of China.

The New York Times reports, in China the political job that matters most is the general secretary of the Communist Party. The party controls the military and domestic security forces and sets the policies that the government carries out. China’s presidency lacks the authority of the American and French presidencies.

The newspaper goes on to say, China’s president is called “zhuxi,” which translates as “chairman.” Foreign presidents get a different title, “zongtong.” So in effect, Chinese people are referring to Xi as the “state chairman,” though in English his title is officially translated as “state president” to put him on an even footing with other world leaders.

The way the world comprehends the Middle Kingdom (frequently too often based on how we see and interact with our American government) has caused the Chinese presidency to become increasingly prominent thanks to China’s growing global stature. At home, Xi usually speaks as party leader; abroad, he appears as president, who is the formal head of state ensuring the prestige of state visits to the White House or Buckingham Palace.

No lame duck in Beijing: As posted earlier this month, markets have welcomed China’s plan to change its constitution. Many business analysts say the political certainty should be mostly positive for Chinese assets and global business in the short term. The move bolsters the Xi’s ability to drive through policies, such as deleveraging, proper economic reform, and anti-pollution campaigns. 

There is no doubt Xi needs more time to reform and improve China - as well as build the China Dream (whatever that means). Frankly, the Party has done well improving the quality of life for many Chinese, but it has done all it can under the current economic model. 

China needs a new plan, a new mission, and more competition to become a genuinely world-class economy and country. This will take more time. Just like we have special interests, factions, Blue and Red state voters, so does China. Politics across the globe remains the realm of doing what is possible and leading diversified coalitions. So Xi is telling his country and the world he needs at least ten more years, and not only five more years as a lame duck leader.

Two decades on top with an adjective: A top leader can probably efficiently govern for 15 to 17 years. The French president can lead for a total of 14 years, and even Americans picked FDR to win four presidential elections. Where the real problem comes into play is when a nation's top leader starts approaching years 20 and on and when feelgood adjectives like great, supreme, and wise are added before leader's name. 

When this occurs, you are going to experience more problems internally and externally. The absence of checks and balances and inability to keep factions at peace, no doubt raises the risk of policy errors and making too many financial moves solely for political, faction pleasing reasons, and not sound business and national reasons. As we have seen around the world, staying in the big chair for too long rarely ends well for the occupant and places the country under much distress.

Not a clueless dreamer: China's state-managed news media have said that Xi wants to abandon the term limit so he can keep his trinity of leadership posts. Xinhua reports, having a term limit on just the presidency is unreasonable because neither of Xi’s other two major posts — party leader and military chairman — has a similar ceiling. Xi seems determined to remain “three-in-one” leader because he sees himself on a historic mission to make China into a great power believing achieving this ideal will take more than a decade - if not longer.

People’s Daily said earlier this month that ending the presidential term limit does not “imply a system of lifelong leadership.” The point seems to be that while Xi may be around for a while, he won’t be another Mao, who remained in power even as he grew ill and incoherent with age.

I realize this is optimistic and requires the mindset of an enlightened statesman - but it would be foolish not to take these viewpoints into account. China's leadership has well telegraphed the need for a leader to have more than two terms for years. This decision didn't just happen on this weekend. No one can deny China is overwhelmed by emperor culture, burdensome bureaucrats, and special interests who have won using the past model are unlikely to give up their gains without being pressured.

The two who voted against: If I were to make an educated guess, the two votes against this idea were cast by Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang. Governing China looks tough for those in power, but there is always someone in the wings ready to sit in the big chair.

Marc A. Ross is the founder of Caracal Global and specializes in global communications and thought leader management at the intersection of politics, policy, and profits. Working with boardrooms and C-Suite executives from multinational corporations, trade associations, and disruptive startups, Marc helps leaders create compelling communications, focused content, and winning commerce.

Social media - what is it good for?

Social media marketing has been the hottest marketing concept for the past decade. And why not?

With just a little effort, the marketing machine complex has amazingly shifted the production and creativity to a workforce that does all the heavy-lifting for free.

Free.

Consumer generated content, for free.

Direct to consumer engagement, for free.

Friends and family telling what to buy, where to eat, what to watch, all for free.

But is social media marketing losing steam or are we at the pioneer stage of these tools?

This week Pew Research is out with their annual report on Social Media Use in the United States.

And to no one's surprise, a majority of Americans use Facebook and YouTube, and young adults are unusually heavy users of Snapchat and Instagram. The survey of US adults finds that the social media landscape in early 2018 is defined by a mix of long-standing trends and newly emerging narratives. 

As has been the case since the Pew began surveying about the use of different social media in 2012, Facebook remains the primary platform for most Americans. But the social media story extends well beyond Facebook. The video-sharing site YouTube is now used by nearly three-quarters of US adults and 94% of 18- to 24-year-olds.

But there are pronounced differences in the use of various social media platforms within the young adult population as well. Americans ages 18 to 24 are substantially more likely to use platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, and Twitter even when compared with those in their mid- to late-20s. 

As was true in previous surveys of social media use, there is a substantial amount of overlap between users of the various sites measured in this survey. Most notably, a significant majority of users of each of these social platforms also indicate that they use Facebook and YouTube. But this “reciprocity” extends to other sites as well. For instance, roughly three-quarters of both Twitter (73%) and Snapchat (77%) users also indicate that they use Instagram. 

This overlap is broadly indicative of the fact that many Americans use multiple social platforms. Roughly three-quarters of the public (73%) uses more than one of the eight platforms measured in this survey, and the typical (median) American uses three of these sites. 

As might be expected, younger adults tend to use a greater variety of social media platforms. The median 18- to 29-year-old uses four of these platforms, but that figure drops to three among 30- to 49-year-olds, to two among 50- to 64-year-olds and one among those 65 and older.

So is social media marketing still a thing?

Yes.

But what does this social media thing mean for marketers, communicators, and advocates?

A few ideas.

Americans might say in polite company they don't love social media, but their activity says otherwise as they use these tools and use them a lot. Second, social media users take advantage of multiple platforms and embrace their unique tweaks. Finally, it may be early days of social media, but there is a lot of content and distraction out there - and frankly, most of it is junk food for the brain.

For marketers, communicators, and advocates to take advantage of these tools they must think reinforce, reward, recognize, refresh, and research.

Also, your content must be outstanding because the consumer has multiple channels for distraction, others want your audience, and if the user doesn't feel special, someone else will give them a home.

And most importantly, more and more content is being produced daily. Just like this Ross Rant, content will be easily created and then placed on a minimum of six social media and digital platforms.

So keep on using social media marketing but make sure your content and engagement reinforces, rewards, recognizes, refreshes, and is well researched.

If you want more, you can access the full report here: https://goo.gl/rWdo9g

Marc A. Ross is the founder of Caracal Global and specializes in global communications and thought leader management at the intersection of politics, policy, and profits. Working with boardrooms and C-Suite executives from multinational corporations, trade associations, and disruptive startups, Marc helps leaders create compelling communications, focused content, and winning commerce.