Comparison of Trump and Harris Policies: Chinese Companies Face Tariff Wars in the U.S., Trump's Approach More Aggressive, Harris Relatively Mild but Challenges Remain

In the field of international trade, both Trump, who represents the Republican Party, and Harris, who represents the Democratic Party, have shown a certain degree of consistency in their China policies. While there are significant differences between the two parties on a number of policy areas, including taxes, government spending, immigration and regulation, they are almost identical when it comes to China, with a preference for tariffs.

Specifically, the policy differences between the two parties can be summarized as follows: The Trump administration has taken a more aggressive approach to international trade, imposing tariffs not only on China, but also attacking other countries in Europe, Asia and other countries almost indiscriminately. Trump, whose policies lean toward protectionism and emphasize "America first," has taken a hard line on trade issues, seeking to reduce trade deficits by imposing tariffs and protecting domestic industries.

By contrast, Harris' Democratic Party, while also supporting trade restrictions against China in some cases, has generally been relatively moderate. Harris's policy is more in favor of multilateral cooperation and free trade, although critical of China in some key areas, but more friendly in others.

From these policy differences, it can be seen that no matter which side comes to power, Chinese enterprises will face certain challenges in terms of exports. However, Trump's policies have made the challenge even more acute, and his approach has made foreign trade companies feel as if they need to grit their teeth to cope. While Harris's policy has its challenges, Chinese companies are likely to feel a slightly looser environment, relatively speaking.

In general, whether it is a Republican or a Democratic administration, China will face certain difficulties in the field of international trade, but Trump's policy is more radical, and the challenge for Chinese enterprises is greater. While Harris's policy has its challenges, Chinese companies are likely to feel a slightly looser environment, relatively speaking.

When it comes to corporate regulation and taxation, Donald Trump's presidency has been a relatively favourable environment for companies looking to list in the US. As a businessman-turned-president, Trump favors a lighter regulatory approach to key industries such as finance and energy. He argued that the government should hand over more regulatory authority to the market, thereby creating a relatively free trading environment. One of the core of Trump's policies is to reduce the corporate tax burden, especially for the wealthy, which largely protects the interests of his class.

Kamala Harris, on the other hand, has a different view. She advocated that the government should strengthen market supervision and stressed the goal of "robbing the rich and giving to the poor" by raising taxes. Harris believes the government should reduce the wealth gap by taxing the rich more heavily and redistributing the money at the bottom of society. This policy proposition dovetails with long-standing Democratic policy ideas. For example, during the presidency of Democratic former President Barack Obama, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank) was enacted to strengthen regulation of the financial industry. During his administration, current President Joe Biden has also conducted strict antitrust reviews of various large enterprises, including tech giants such as Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta and TikTok, thus strengthening the supervision of these enterprises.

In summary, the policy differences between the two parties on corporate regulation and taxation are as follows: After Trump took office, he tended to loosen regulations and reduce the corporate tax burden, especially for the wealthy. This policy orientation is conducive to the development of the financial market, making it easier for companies to list in the United States, thus attracting more foreign capital to flow into the U.S. market. After Harris took office, she advocated strengthening market regulation and raising tax rates, which may have a negative effect on financial markets, reduce foreign capital inflows, and may even lead to foreign capital flight.

In this policy context, we can see that Trump's policies are indeed more conducive to the development of the business environment. To be specific:

1. After Trump came to power, localized operation in the United States has become a priority strategy for overseas enterprises. No matter which candidate is in office, a trade war against China is inevitable, and tariffs are almost certain. In this case, overseas companies will give priority to local operations in the United States, find local suppliers, open factories in the local, hire local employees, in order to avoid the tariff problem.

2. The real economy industry faces greater difficulties in going overseas to the United States, while the digital economy industry may be supported by the Trump administration. Because of the tariff problem, if the supplier is still a domestic enterprise, it will be difficult for the enterprise to avoid the tariff burden. If you choose suppliers from other countries, such as Indian enterprises, then enterprises need to go through a period of running-in, which is unfavorable for real economy enterprises. However, for games, entertainment and other Internet digital economy industries, because there is no inventory, it can be easier to bypass the tariff problem. Such enterprises mainly focus on the landing of business models or the promotion of localized products. Therefore, there are opportunities for games to go to sea, social software to go to sea, and service industries to go to sea, especially after Trump comes to power, it is expected that the regulatory environment will be relatively loose, and the number of related companies listed in the United States may increase. However, it is important to note that profits earned after localized operations in the United States may not be so easy to bring back home.

The Trump administration's stricter immigration policies have created significant headaches for those seeking to stay or study in the United States. It was clear from Trump's debate with Harris that he continually emphasized that the centerpiece of his re-election strategy is the deportation of illegal immigrants. The overall tightening of immigration policy reflects Trump's political stance, and although the focus is on illegal immigration and border control, the overall trend of the policy reflects his strict approach to immigration.

For those who pay attention to work visas for international students or immigration policies to the United States, the major changes to H-1B visa policy during the Trump administration are obvious. These changes, including raising minimum wage requirements, limiting applicants' academic background and shortening the duration of visas, have significantly increased the difficulty of obtaining work visas for international students.

Trump's new executive order overhauled H-1B policy, and Silicon Valley could be significantly affected. In a report by Time Weekly on April 25, 2017, it was mentioned that another important aspect of international students staying in the United States is the OPT program, which is the visa for international students to practice in the United States after graduation. Trump has proposed to limit or eliminate the OPT program, and U.S. immigration authorities have deported overseas students in the United States. Trump has also suspended H-1B student work visas, which has had a significant impact on the job prospects of international students.

While many of the policies were never implemented, Trump's tight grip on immigration policy was evident. It can be expected that, given the opportunity, he may continue to push for reforms that he has failed to implement before.

On immigration policy, there are clear differences between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans prefer to tighten immigration policies across the board, deporting illegal immigrants and tightening border controls. The Democratic Party, on the other hand, is more moderate and more receptive to illegal immigrants. Zhihu user @Shin Doudou pointed out that although the H-1B visa approval rate did decline year by year, Trump's policies undoubtedly exacerbated the trend.

The U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services (USCIS) announced in April that the first round of the FY2025 H-1B work visa lottery had been completed. This year, the total number of H-1B registrations is 479,953, the number of valid registrations is 470,342, and the total number of successful applications is 120,603, with a winning rate of about 25.6%. By comparing the data from 2021 to 2025, we can observe the following trends in the winning rate:

After Trump took office, many international students felt lost and unsure of how to plan for the future. It has also become more difficult to obtain a green card. Therefore, for some people, staying at home may be a wiser choice, because the difficulty of going abroad is increasing.