President Trump’s summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing appeared to ease tensions and open channels of cooperation, but several trade experts say it produced few concrete or binding victories for the United States.
Analysts expected large, specific purchase commitments for American goods and energy but found mostly broad, verbal promises. “I was expecting that China would announce mega purchases of U.S. agriculture, energy and airplanes,” said Wendy Cutler, a former U.S. Trade Representative negotiator. “So far, it doesn’t seem like Trump and his team have a lot to show for the visit.”
Trump described the trip as “incredible,” saying the two leaders had secured “fantastic trade deals.” Chinese officials signaled willingness to expand cooperation. David Meale, head of the China practice at Eurasia Group, said both sides are portraying progress but noted a lack of detailed public commitments: “Neither side has come out with a clear statement of details. I don’t think that means it’s a failure or that those deals don’t exist. They just need to cross the Ts and dot the Is.”
The clearest commercial winner from the visit appears to be Boeing. The president said China agreed to purchase at least 200 Boeing jets, possibly rising to 750 over time. Boeing called the trip a success and said reopening the China market to aircraft orders was a major objective. The company described the initial 200-aircraft commitment as a first tranche, with further commitments expected.
But the announcement fell short of some market expectations. Analysts at Capital Economics noted the initial order was smaller than some had anticipated, and Boeing shares dropped about 3.8% on the news, suggesting investors were underwhelmed.
The White House said China also agreed to buy more U.S. oil and agricultural products — including “billions of dollars of soybeans” — and announced a U.S.-China “Board of Trade” and “Board of Investment” to manage economic ties. A White House official said the trip produced important agricultural agreements and an aircraft purchase agreement that could boost U.S. manufacturing jobs, with fuller details to come.
Experts caution those announcements are largely non-binding at this stage. Erica Downs, an energy policy expert at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, said there was no public, verifiable commitment for specific oil purchases: “Saying that China wants to buy more energy from the U.S. will please Trump, but it doesn’t bind China to anything.” Economists and trade specialists noted many of the claims remain verbal and subject to confirmation and contract negotiations.
Past precedent underscores the uncertainty. After Trump’s 2017 China visit, a headline agreement with the state-owned China Energy Investment Corporation to invest roughly $84 billion in U.S. shale and chemical projects never materialized as U.S.-China tensions later mounted.
Despite the lack of immediate, enforceable deals, some observers see value in resetting the tone between the world’s two largest economies. Cutler said the leaders have an opportunity to reframe the relationship as more stable and to create mechanisms for managing disputes. Reuters has reported the two sides discussed the potential to lift tariffs on about $30 billion in goods as part of a managed-trade approach.
Analysts point out, however, that $30 billion would represent less than 10% of bilateral trade in 2025. And tariff levels remain elevated: estimates from the Penn Wharton Budget Model put the effective U.S. tariff rate on Chinese imports near 32% as of February, while Chinese duties on U.S. exports average around 10%.
Trade experts stressed this summit need not be the final word. Many of the announcements could be formalized in the coming weeks or months as negotiators work out details. For now, the meeting appears to have produced a diplomatic reset and preliminary agreements, but little in the way of binding, immediate economic wins for the United States.