The Yuan Trap – A Speculative Detour Through the Fog of Global Trade

“Regulators and bankers were using the wrong tools and the wrong metrics. Unfortunately, they still are.”

–Jim Rickards, Currency Wars

May 13, 2025 — Hypothesis for the day: Sometimes the answers you get matter less than asking the right questions. Let’s give that a whirl with a few “what ifs…”:

What if the real trade barrier with China wasn’t cheap labor, clever supply chains, or state-owned factories churning out widgets at half the cost?

What if the real barrier — the one no one dares to name in polite diplomatic company — was the yuan itself?

That’s the suspicion lurking in the minds of those who’ve been around long enough to see economic history rhyme, if not repeat.

And it’s a suspicion Jamieson Greer — former chief trade negotiator under Trump and longtime advocate for tougher trade terms — appears ready to drag into the daylight. Greer insists any future deal with China must tackle non-tariff barriers.

But what exactly are we talking about?

First, let’s demystify the term. Non-tariff barriers aren’t tariffs. They’re stealthier. Trickier. More… Chinese.

They include arbitrary food safety rules, tech transfer demands, opaque licensing procedures, outright bans on foreign firms for “national security” reasons — and, yes, currency manipulation.

That last one is the dragon in the room.

Imagine, for a moment, that all the talk of trade deficits and factory closures in Ohio were downstream effects not of wage arbitrage or environmental shortcuts, but a central bank in Beijing intentionally weakening its currency to juice exports and hoard dollar-denominated assets. A grand illusion. A monetary matador’s cape.

Every time you buy a $14 toaster, you’re playing your part in the performance.

Currency manipulation is rarely called out in public, because the implications are too profound. It means the entire framework of “fair trade” is a fantasy. It means all those tariffs and retaliatory duties are just Band-Aids on a broken bone.

Greer knows this. That’s why he’s pushing for something bigger than tariffs. Something comprehensive. Something real.

Because if China’s real advantage is not cheap labor, but artificially cheap currency, then we’re not competing with a country — we’re competing with a monetary mirage.

And it gets worse.

What if the yuan’s next devaluation isn’t just a tweak to boost exports, but a desperate attempt to manage capital flight, mask domestic weakness, or retaliate against U.S. tech sanctions?

In 2015, a minor yuan devaluation sent shockwaves through global markets. Today, with fragile liquidity, bloated debt, and a Federal Reserve still nursing a post-COVID balance sheet hangover, the next one could detonate a global chain reaction.

And markets? They won’t wait for the policy papers. They’ll react — as they always do — to the headline, the rumor, the innuendo. A whisper in the Financial Times. A speech misinterpreted in Shanghai. A Twitter post from someone with a flag avatar and too much time on their hands.

In this climate, even Greer’s quiet insistence that we deal with non-tariff barriers might as well be a klaxon.

So here’s the “what if” – the Grey Swan event – no one wants to entertain out loud:

What if the entire post-WTO global trade regime has been predicated on a silent agreement to look the other way while China juiced its currency, flooded markets with artificially cheap goods, and quietly bought up Treasurys like Monopoly money?

What if the world’s faith in globalization wasn’t ever rooted in comparative advantage, but in mutual monetary gaslighting?

And what happens when that faith runs out?

~ Addison Wiggin

P.S. Greer’s whisper may be the canary in the yuan mine. Meanwhile, gold is inching up, possibly to soar much, much higher, bitcoin is challenging the fiat system anew, and the BRICS are circling the petrodollar, and platforms like Glintpay are doing what Washington won’t — giving you an off-ramp. It’s not the headlines you need to watch. It’s the questions behind them.

“Regulators and bankers were using the wrong tools and the wrong metrics. Unfortunately, they still are.”

–Jim Rickards, Currency Wars

May 13, 2025 — Hypothesis for the day: Sometimes the answers you get matter less than asking the right questions. Let’s give that a whirl with a few “what ifs…”:

What if the real trade barrier with China wasn’t cheap labor, clever supply chains, or state-owned factories churning out widgets at half the cost?

What if the real barrier — the one no one dares to name in polite diplomatic company — was the yuan itself?

That’s the suspicion lurking in the minds of those who’ve been around long enough to see economic history rhyme, if not repeat.

But what exactly are we talking about?

First, let’s demystify the term. Non-tariff barriers aren’t tariffs. They’re stealthier. Trickier. More… Chinese.

They include arbitrary food safety rules, tech transfer demands, opaque licensing procedures, outright bans on foreign firms for “national security” reasons — and, yes, currency manipulation.

That last one is the dragon in the room.

Every time you buy a $14 toaster, you’re playing your part in the performance.

Greer knows this. That’s why he’s pushing for something bigger than tariffs. Something comprehensive. Something real.

Because if China’s real advantage is not cheap labor, but artificially cheap currency, then we’re not competing with a country — we’re competing with a monetary mirage.

And it gets worse.

What if the yuan’s next devaluation isn’t just a tweak to boost exports, but a desperate attempt to manage capital flight, mask domestic weakness, or retaliate against U.S. tech sanctions?

In this climate, even Greer’s quiet insistence that we deal with non-tariff barriers might as well be a klaxon.

So here’s the “what if” – the Grey Swan event – no one wants to entertain out loud:

What if the world’s faith in globalization wasn’t ever rooted in comparative advantage, but in mutual monetary gaslighting?

And what happens when that faith runs out?

~ Addison Wiggin

Our forecast will feel obvious in hindsight and controversial in advance — the hallmark of a Grey Swan.

Most analysts we speak to are thinking in terms of the history of Western conflict.

They expect full-frontal military engagement.

Beijing, from our modest perch, prefers resolution because resolution compounds its power. Why sacrifice the workshop of the world, when cajoling and bribery will do?

Taiwan will not fall.

It will merge.

Wars, technology races, and political upheavals — all of them rest on fiscal capacity.

In 2026, that capacity will tighten across the developed world simultaneously. Democracies will discover that generosity financed by debt carries conditions, whether voters approve of them or not.

Bond markets will not shout so much as clear their throats. Repeatedly.

Taken together, the seven Grey Swans of 2025 behaved less like isolated events and more like interlocking stories readers already recognize.

The year moved in phases. A sharp April selloff cleared leverage quickly. Policy shifted toward tax relief, lighter regulation, and renewed tolerance for liquidity. Innovations began to slowly dominate the marketplace conversation – from Dollar 2.0 digital assets to AI-powered applications in all manner of commercial enterprises, ranging from airline and hotel bookings to driverless taxis and robots.

Back in April, when we published what we called the Trump Great Reset Strategy, we described the grand realignment we believed President Trump and his acolytes were embarking on in three phases.

At the time, it read like a conceptual map. As the months passed, it began to feel like a set of operating instructions written in advance of turbulence.

As you can expect, any grandiose plan would get all kinds of blowback… but this year exhibited all manner of Trump Derangement Syndrome on top of the difficulty of steering a sclerotic empire clear of the rocky shores.

The “phases” were never about optimism or pessimism. They were about sequencing — how stress surfaces, how systems adapt, and what must hold before confidence can regenerate. And in the end, what do we do with our money?!