MKsport on December 3, 2024. Photo: VCG" src="https://www.globaltimes.cn/Portals/0/attachment/2025/2025-02-06/af722914-2fe9-4cef-a739-8683993e17fa.jpeg" />

A US Postal Service employee sorts parcels for distribution during the start of the holiday mail rush, on December 3, 2024. Photo: VCG

In less than 24 hours, the US Postal Service (USPS) staged a policy "U-turn." It abruptly suspended the acceptance of packages from the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong, only to hastily announce the restoration of parcel services later. This dramatic turnaround came against the backdrop of the US announcing a new 10 percent tariff on imports from China and halting the duty exemption policy for low-value packages, quickly drawing international attention. A USPS spokesperson stated that they were working with customs and other departments such as Border Protection to implement an "efficient collection mechanism" for the new tariffs "to ensure the least disruption to package delivery." This statement revealed the contradictions and confusion within the US stance, while also highlighting the deep interconnection and inherent resilience of China-US economic and trade relations.

Although the policy of temporarily suspending accepting packages was in effect for a short time, the confusion caused in the supply chain during those few hours was very real. DHL, a global logistics company, stated that they were working to limit negative impacts for them and consumers, and to avoid disruption to supply chains. FedEx also suspended its money-back guarantee for US-inbound shipments. Furthermore, Martin Palmer, co-founder of cross-border e-commerce company Hurricane Commerce, bluntly admitted that they were "running around like headless chickens." Numerous US retailers and manufacturers relying on imports from China faced both product shortages and price hikes, forcing them to urgently alter procurement and sales strategies. This likely caught US policymakers by surprise and serves as a reminder, or even a lesson, for them.

This farce highlights the arbitrariness and confusion in Washington's policymaking; however, it also reflects the deep social ties and intertwined interests between China and the US. According to US Customs data, approximately 4 million small parcels valued at under $800 are shipped daily from China to the US. In terms of absolute numbers, this may not seem like a "major" part of the vast trade between China and the US, but since most of these items are daily necessities for American households and businesses - such as low-cost clothing, toys, electronic devices, as well as essential manufacturing components like screws and valve cores - the pain caused by the cancellation of the "de minimis exemption" can quickly ripple through the fabric of American society. This immediate impact on people's livelihoods is likely the main reason behind the abrupt policy reversal.

It's necessary to note that the USPS' policy reversal is not a fundamental correction of mistakes but rather technical adjustment in policy implementation. Underlying these shifts are preconceived biases and prejudices against China, which are emblematic of the politicization of US trade policy. Small and medium-sized enterprises and ordinary citizens in the US are becoming the biggest victims of this pathological mind-set and paranoid policies. E-commerce and logistics platform Easyship pointed out that consumers may therefore bear price hikes, while related businesses will also face the risk of reduced competitiveness. John Pickel, Senior Director of International Supply Chain Policy at the US National Foreign Trade Council, said, "We're not just talking about $5 dresses and other types of clothing," adding, "We're talking about inputs that power US manufacturing and really move the US economy."

The close China-US economic and trade ties are not only reflected in the flow of goods but are also rooted in the complementarity of the two countries' industrial structures. Whether it is Chinese platforms like Shein and Temu meeting the personalized needs of American consumers through a "small orders and quick response" model, or Amazon's third-party sellers relying on Chinese supply chains to maintain price competitiveness, these developments are not coincidental. The efficiency and innovation capabilities of Chinese manufacturing provide a rich supply of choices for the US retail sector, while the purchasing power of the US market inject momentum into the transformation and upgrading of Chinese enterprises. This results from optimized resource allocation within the global division of labor, from which both China and the US benefit.

Fast delivery and low prices are inherent advantages of cross-border e-commerce and are important driving forces behind the booming development of global digital trade. Chinese cross-border logistics platforms are moving toward "72-hour global delivery," reducing the distance between producers in South China's Guangdong Province and consumers in New York to just three working days. This efficiency revolution has, to some extent, redefined the nature of international trade. Regardless of how a country's policies may adjust, it is difficult to erase the advantages inherent to cross-border e-commerce, and it is impossible to change the overarching trend of digital development in international trade. Adapting to this trend and optimizing processes with a more open mind-set is the wise choice for regulators in various countries; if they simply build trade barriers, they are bound to face dilemmas due to resistance from all sides, a reality that the USPS has likely experienced firsthand.

Currently, the development trend in global trade is evolving from traditional goods trade, value chain trade, and service trade to digital trade, with major economies around the world increasing their investments in the field of digital trade. As the world's two largest economies, China and the US have a responsibility to work together to make digital trade a new engine for shared development. The USPS' "U-turn drama" serves as a mirror, reflecting the absurdity and limitations of unilateralism. The economic and trade ties between China and the US cannot be severed by a mere executive order; only through joint cooperation can consumers on both sides of the Pacific share the benefits of trade.