Digital Trade - China and USA

The US and China view digital trade differently

Published: 13:43, September 14, 2018

The United States and China view digital trade differently; a team of researchers has found. In other words, they have contrasting approaches to e-commerce. If they acknowledge their different approaches to digital trade, policymakers might find ways to eliminate trade barriers. This is what Prof. Henry Gao believes.

Gao is an Associate Professor at the Singapore Management University School of Law.

He wrote about his study and findings in the Journal of International Economic Law (citation below). It was the first comparative study of the two countries’ different approaches to issues related to digital trade.

The Internet brought digital trade

Digital trade emerged soon after the advent of the Internet. Suddenly, the sales of goods and services were no longer an exclusively physical experience with storefronts and geographical borders.

The advent of digital trade has significantly raised the stakes for companies.

In many cases, the precise definitions of digital products and whether they should be subject to customs duties, tariffs, or quotas is still unclear. They are unclear, specifically, at the international level. In other words, digital trade between countries.

Digital trade approaches of China and the US
Regarding digital trade approaches, the author writes the following in an Abstract that precedes the main article: “The US approach tends to focus more on the ‘digital’ nature of digital trade, while the Chinese approach prefers to address the issue from the traditional ‘trade’ perspective.”

Digital trade regulation

In this study, the author tracked digital trade regulations by the World Trade Organization. He highlighted that its members have so far not been able to reach an agreement on the rules governing digital trade.

Prof. Gao also noted that the world’s ten biggest Internet companies are all American or Chinese businesses. This suggests that the US and China are poised to play major roles in crafting international e-commerce regulations.

The ten largest Internet companies are Amazon, Google (Alphabet), Facebook, Priceline, eBay, Netflix, JD.com, Baidu, Tencent, and Alibaba.

Prof. Gao examined proposals made by the two countries at several economic fora (or forums) and the WTO. He also examined e-commerce clauses in each country’s free trade agreements. He subsequently documented a stark difference in China’s and America’s positions on digital trade.

The two countries focus on different things

Prof. Gao explained:

“The US tends to focus more on the ‘digital’ side [of e-commerce], which includes internet search and social networking.”

“China, however, focuses more on the traditional ‘trade’ side, that is, trade in goods. In other words, the US trades bits while China still trades atoms.”

The US, therefore, cares more about digital barriers such as Internet censorship and cross-border data flow restrictions.

China, on the other hand, is more concerned about traditional trade barriers such as tariffs, the author argues.

Different domestic regulatory frameworks

Additionally, the two nations’ distinct domestic regulatory frameworks influence their stances on digital trade regulation.

Let market forces determine

The United States has a historical preference to let market forces determine acceptable boundaries for e-commerce and the Internet domestically. The term ‘Market forces’ refers to the forces of supply and demand.

The US has also expressed a preference for deregulation regarding digital trade at international level.

Strong government control

China, on the other hand, has opted for stronger government control over the Internet. This standpoint is embedded in its e-commerce proposals to the WTO, Prof. Gao noted.

Regarding China’s and America’s deeply entrenched differences, Prof. Gao suggests:

“These deeply entrenched differences will require time to reconcile. To move forward, perhaps both countries could start with issues where they share some common interests, such as a permanent moratorium on customs duties on e-commerce.”

Citation

“Digital or Trade? The Contrasting Approaches of China and US to Digital Trade,” Henry S. Gao, Journal of International Economic Law, Volume 21, Issue 2, 1 June 2018, Pages 297-321, DOI: 10.1093/jiel/jgy015.


Christian Nordqvist Avatar

Other News

How describing the same food as having few ingredients can change interest

Nov 2, 2026

Suggested prices can change what marketplace sellers earn, Mercari experiment finds

Nov 2, 2026

A change of month can make a sale feel farther away, marketing study suggests

Nov 2, 2026

New and established brands drew different responses to advertising appeals in study

Nov 2, 2026

Community promotions gave lesser-known authors a sales lift in Quebec study

Nov 2, 2026

Believable price guarantees linked to greater trust in retailer survey

Nov 1, 2026

Where customers receive free samples can affect what they do next

Nov 1, 2026

Branded search ads showed no clear sales lift in small business tests

Nov 1, 2026

Tokenized markets promise faster trades, but legal rights and liquidity remain unresolved

Nov 1, 2026

Internet coverage alone cannot close the digital divide, World Bank says

Nov 1, 2026

Energy upgrades can save businesses money, but financing the work remains a hurdle

Nov 1, 2026

Why tighter credit can disrupt supply chains before orders disappear

Oct 31, 2026

South Africa plans a more open payments system as digital transactions grow

Oct 31, 2026

African cities face a jobs test as urban populations grow

Oct 31, 2026

Online platforms can open foreign markets, but sellers still face costs

Oct 31, 2026

Trade barriers beyond tariffs can keep Balkan exporters from growing

Oct 31, 2026

Off-grid solar reaches more customers, but affordability limits its growth

Oct 31, 2026

World Bank survey finds a wide gap in business innovation across economies

Oct 30, 2026

Air conditioning is adding a growing challenge for electricity grids

Oct 30, 2026

Fewer bidders can make public contracts harder for businesses and taxpayers

Oct 30, 2026