But the firm couldn’t reach a fee agreement with local officials, who cut off negotiations without explanation or compensation.
That seemed to be that, until an HKS partner saw the expo that came to fruition. He was stunned. The venue featured a pale facsimile ‐ ripped off by a local design institute ‐ of the firm’s plans.
In the 1980's, my employer had a similar experience in the Middle East.
"There’s nothing we can do," Hawkins remembered thinking, knowing from years of working in China that the "lack of rule of law" means American businesses operating there "basically have no recourse against anybody."
So somebody ought to do something about this. But not the Orange Man and his bad tariffs.
Unfair trading practices in China are at the core of President Donald Trump’s high-dollar trade war against America’s economic rival, particularly when it comes to longstanding complaints over intellectual property theft, forced technology transfer and other costly problems.Cost of doing business, man. The consumer can suck up the resulting costs. Move along, move along.
The underlying issue often gets lost in the cacophony of concern that’s emerged from the business community over Trump’s reliance on tariffs as a way to force Beijing’s hand.
Shriek! Not in my backyard. Go gore somebody else's ox!
But there’s widespread agreement about the need to bring China to account. That urgency has only increased as more and more U.S. companies have found that they can’t afford not to work in China, challenges and all, because of the vast business opportunities there.
We need a more nuanced approach, like that of Hillary. Or Jawn F'in Kerry.
But the basis for his action is actually the U.S. Office of the Trade Representative’s finding that China’s trade practices are "unreasonable" and "discriminatory."
Unexpectedly, the Chinese disagree.
"The complaints against China’s trade practices are very real," said Doug Barry of the U.S.-China Business Council, a Washington-based industry group. Among the issues flagged by Barry: The proliferation of fake goods made in China. The practice of forcing U.S. companies, via joint ventures, to transfer over prized tech in order to operate there. The government subsidization of Chinese enterprises, which undercuts U.S. businesses.
| It’s "not politically expedient for the Chinese" to make a deal. |
Experts like David Jacobson are dubious. He advises U.S. companies on how to operate in China after spending years traveling between the two countries on business.
Jacobson cautioned against viewing the latest trade truce as "really a substantial lessening of tensions," explaining that it’s "not politically expedient for the Chinese" to make a deal To that end, he’s bearish about the prospect of an agreement that produces systemic change.
"I would love to see it," he said. "But I don’t have much hope."
Let's hope Trump surprises us all.