On Monday morning, the United States and China announced a mutual agreement to suspend most punitive tariffs on each other's products for a period of 90 days.

Under this agreement, tariffs on goods exported from China to the US will decrease from 145% to 30%, while tariffs on products sent from the US to China will be reduced from 10% to the same rate of 10% for the next three months.

This action effectively returns both countries to the status quo prior to April 2, when President Donald Trump initially imposed tariffs, significantly impacting the global economy.

This recent development marks a rollback of previous decisions made by the Trump administration, reflecting a pattern of reversing earlier trade stances since the president took office.

The global markets experienced volatility after the April announcements, with stock exchanges plunging significantly when tariffs were introduced.

Following the announcement of a temporary suspension of tariffs on all countries, excluding China, stock indices surged, reflecting investor relief and optimism about economic stability.

The United States is a substantial market that imports a significant volume of goods from overseas, presenting an ongoing challenge for the Trump administration.

The prospect of increased tariffs had adverse effects on economies around the world, particularly for China, as the country engaged in a tit-for-tat trade war.

However, after a month, diplomatic negotiations resumed, culminating in the recent agreement that all parties have framed as a victory.

In a statement following the announcement on April 9, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reiterated that the president's strategy was always aimed at prompting negotiations.

He indicated that the tariff rates were a means to leverage talks, asserting that this approach positioned China unfavorably.

The Trump administration claims that negotiations have led to increased engagement from over 75 countries seeking agreements with the US.

Despite these claims, the tangible outcomes of such discussions have been limited.

A significant public agreement only emerged on May 8 when the UK and the US declared a mutual commitment to facilitate trade.

However, details surrounding this agreement remained scant, primarily filled with diplomatic language that emphasized mutual benefits and fairness in international trade.

Trump stated that the agreement would enhance US export opportunities, particularly for agricultural products, dramatically increasing market access for items such as beef and ethanol produced by American farmers.

In return, the US agreed to lower tariffs on select vehicles manufactured in the UK and provided exemptions for steel and aluminum exports.

Experts have conducted analyses suggesting that the recent developments will not significantly alter trade conditions between the US and China, as the 10% tariff remains in place on most goods.

The agreement, framed as a success by both parties, lacks concrete details, with Trump proclaiming it as "the first of many" and a "great deal" in his social media communications.

Following the latest announcement, some might assume that the US-China trade war has reached an endpoint, paving a path towards resolution.

However, economists remain skeptical.

According to analysts, although the joint statement has somewhat calmed tensions, it fails to address the deteriorating economic relationship and the overarching trend towards a complete economic decoupling.

Alicia Garcia-Herrero, Chief Economist for Asia Pacific at Natixis, described the situation as a "more civilized way of divorce," implying that the separation between the two economies will continue, albeit at a slower pace.

She noted that the agreement serves primarily as a means to mitigate the complexities of the ongoing disconnection while aiming to avert a global recession.

This analysis mirrors sentiments regarding the UK agreement, which, while characterized as a diplomatic success, lacks substantial details for assessment.

Experts see that China can present itself as a benevolent global player, while Trump can assert pressure leading to the agreement.

Post-announcement, Trump highlighted the discussions on social media, alluding to comprehensive negotiations and a friendly yet forward-looking approach.

Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng characterized the agreement as an important first step in improving relations.

This shift represents a fundamental turnaround for both parties, driven by the adverse effects the trade war has had on their economies.

The Chinese economy, already suffering from issues such as unemployment, weak domestic consumption, and deflationary pressures prior to the trade conflict, now faces additional fallout from the tariffs.

Several manufacturers have halted production due to decreased demand for their goods, exacerbated by US tariffs.

Despite strategies employed to circumvent tariffs by routing goods through third countries, the availability of Chinese products in the US market has remained relatively unaffected.

Chinese manufacturers have utilized social media to communicate with American consumers, emphasizing that an end to production would deplete US stores of essential goods.

The global economic ramifications of those tariffs have been pronounced.

According to financial analysis, Trump's tariffs and the consequential threats have had significant detrimental impacts on the world economy.

Notable declines in US stock markets were recorded following the initial tariff announcements, with estimates placing losses at approximately $6.6 trillion in value across global exchanges, equivalent to about 10% of the global GDP.

Economists observe that achieving the stated objectives through tariffs is increasingly impossible, as many goals contradict each other.

Tariffs intended to boost American manufacturing simultaneously disrupt supply chains and increase the costs of raw materials for manufacturers.

Major financial institutions like Goldman Sachs indicate rising probabilities that the trade war may push the US economy into recession, a perspective shared by a relatively united cohort of economists.

Continued enforcement of tariffs could result in recessionary conditions for the United States, potentially dragging down the global economy alongside it.