| 

Comment: US–China hit pause, not peace

This week, Washington and Beijing turned down the temperature, a modest de-escalation that matters for textiles and apparel as much as for macro trade watchers. Following late-October talks, the United States halved its “fentanyl-related” surcharge on Chinese imports to ** per cent with effect from November **. According to US officials, this trims the average reciprocal tariff on Chinese goods to around ** per cent, down from roughly ** per cent.
 
Beijing, for its part, said it will suspend its additional ** per cent retaliatory tariffs for one year. Both sides have also agreed to shelve new reciprocal port fees over the same period. It is a gesture of restraint rather than reconciliation, as the Section *** tariff stack remains firmly in place.
 
That policy thaw meets a trading system already under reconstruction. Since the end of the US de minimis rule on August **, international postal traffic to the United States has collapsed, down ** per cent on day one and still roughly ** per cent in early October. Around ** million small parcels have been converted into formal, taxed entries. The focus has shifted from frictionless checkout to landed-cost clarity, and that is where conversion now lives or dies.
 
Demand signals, meanwhile, sketch a picture of cautious resilience. In the UK, shop prices slipped *.* per cent in October, the first decline since March, offering a faint but welcome real-income boost heading into peak season. In India, Diwali-season trade topped &#****;*.** trillion (over $** billion), highlighting durable consumer appetite even amid global uncertainty. Together, those trends point to tighter open-to-buy budgets, quicker chases on proven icons, and pricing rooted in true landed cost, with brand strength earning its premium.
 
The legal horizon could soon reshape the playing field too. During November * hearings, US Supreme Court justices from across the spectrum expressed scepticism about using emergency powers, invoked by President Donald Trump, to levy sweeping tariffs. A ruling is not expected until ****, but the implications could be significant.
 
Which supply lanes deserve early commitment if the policy climate shifts again? Where should replenishment outweigh novelty if demand stays uneven? And what belongs in the **** playbook if presidential tariff powers are ultimately curtailed?
 
The pause may buy time, but it is not yet peace.