The White House recently announced the establishment of a new U.S.-China Board of Trade designed to enhance bilateral trade relations. However, the board’s governing procedures, released alongside the announcement, offer limited detail on how the body will function or enforce decisions.

Trade tensions between the United States and China have a long history marked by cycles of tariff impositions and retaliations. Starting in 2017 under President Donald Trump, tariffs were progressively raised in an effort to curb China’s trade practices. By 2025, tariff rates had escalated to as high as 145 percent on some goods. While American imports from China declined by approximately 20% during this period, China compensated with increased trade with other partners, undermining the tariffs’ effectiveness.

Previous attempts to manage the trade relationship included the 2020 Phase One agreement, which committed China to purchase an additional $200 billion in U.S. exports. Yet a report from the Peterson Institute for International Economics found that those promises largely went unmet. The current board was introduced following a May visit to Beijing by Trump, who called it the “cornerstone” of a historic agreement between the two nations. Nonetheless, analysts caution that significant uncertainty remains around the board’s impact on tariffs and trade stability.

Supporters of the board argue that it addresses the unique nature of U.S.-China trade, which often involves direct government participation on the Chinese side, unlike typical private transactions with countries such as Mexico. A standing forum could provide a platform for officials to address disputes more proactively and adapt policies in response to changing conditions without relying on slower treaty processes.

Yet the board’s foundational document spans only two pages and contains broad, undefined terms such as “optimize bilateral trade.” It does not clarify who decides on agenda-setting, how proposals are reviewed or approved, or how disagreements are resolved. The officials representing each side include U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Jamieson Greer for the United States, and Vice Premier He Lifeng for China, but their specific roles in the process remain vague. While the board’s procedures state that deputies meet at least quarterly, and principals meet “as necessary,” the overall governance framework lacks specific enforcement mechanisms or transparency.

The board has tentatively approved two product lists for potential tariff reductions. Goods slated for lower U.S. tariffs include toys, small appliances, bedding, and car seats, while agricultural products such as almonds, pistachios, walnuts, oranges, grapes, cherries, wine, and beef are targeted for reduced tariffs entering China. This holds particular importance for California’s agricultural sector, which has seen a sharp decline in export values to China—from an average of $1.5 billion annually between 2020 and 2024 to $554 million in 2025, a 64% drop according to the Giannini Foundation at the University of California.

However, the board’s documents do not specify the timing or exact rates of potential tariff cuts, nor do they clarify how these will be implemented domestically within each country. According to the board’s terms, adjustments are not expected more frequently than once a year, raising concerns among exporters requiring stability and long-term predictability.

With two years of repeated tariff announcements, reversals, and pauses behind them, U.S.-China trade relations remain fraught with uncertainty. While the creation of the Board of Trade signals an intention to ease tensions and lower some tariffs, the lack of clear procedures, enforcement authority, and legislative pathways in the board’s governing documents casts doubt on its ability to bring substantive change in the near term.