The agreement is subject to any violation of monetary commitments in relation to the mechanism for implementing the agreement, which would allow them to obtain U.S. tariffs. Energy accounted for only 8% of the total assets covered by the first phase`s purchase obligations, but its objectives were particularly questionable. Bloomberg reported that it was only after the signing of the agreement that the government learned from U.S. industry that it did not lack production capacity to meet the targets.10 In addition, the assessment of U.S.-China trade relations on the basis of a significant expansion of fossil fuel exports – whose targets include only crude oil , liquid natural gas, coal and refined products – ignores global concerns about climate change. Chinese Trade Minister Gao Hucheng (l.) shakes hands with his South Korean counterpart, Yoon Sang-jick, after the signing of the agreement on June 1, 2015 in Seoul. [Xinhua] This agreement represents an important turning point in U.S. trade policy and in the types of free trade agreements that the United States has generally supported. Instead of reducing tariffs to allow trade in goods and services to meet market demand, the agreement leaves a record level of tariffs and forces China to buy some $200 billion worth of goods in two years. "Today, we are taking an important step we have never taken with China toward a future of fair and reciprocal trade with China," Trump said at a White House ceremony. "Together, we are correcting the injustices of the past." An article in the December 2018 review published by two Chinese academics indicated that, in the worst-case trade war, China would suffer a 1.1% decline in employment and a loss of 1% of GDP, which they said would be negligible but manageable for China.  Another paper published by Chinese academics in February 2018 also concluded that the United States would suffer significant social losses as a result of the trade war, but that China could easily lose or gain depending on the impact of the trade war on the trade balance between the United States and China.
 My co-authors and I attributed the roots of this response to the trade shock in China – some American communities were much more affected by the increase in Chinese exports. Republican elected officials in import-competitor districts accuse China of economic disruption in their districts. Trump`s bashing campaign took advantage of the gulf between Republican leaders and voters over the issue of support for free trade, and his election marked the end of decades of Republican orthodoxy on trade and Chinese issues. On May 20, 2019, the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, a professional shoe association, issued an open letter to President Trump under its leadership: "On behalf of our hundreds of millions of shoe consumers and hundreds of thousands of employees, we ask you to stop this action immediately" and we are referring to the trade war.   In September 2019, Matthew Shay, President and CEO of the National Retail Federation, said the trade war had "taken far too long" and had had a negative impact on U.S. businesses and consumers.