|
|
Global Views
CSIS Commentary
How Much Have the Chinese Actually Taken?
Special Contribution By James Andrew Lewis
 | US President Donald Trump with Chinese President Xi Jinping | US President Donald Trump plans to announce at least $50 billion worth of tariffs and other penalties on China for its theft of intellectual property (IP), technology, and trade secrets. The administration says this theft has cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars in revenue and thousands of jobs. These assertions of loss are correct.Until recently, the United States probably lost between $20 billion and $30 billion annually from Chinese cyber espionage. This does not count the losses from traditional espionage (e.g., using agents). The cumulative cost may reach $600 billion, since this kind of espionage has been going on for more than two decades.Any estimate has to take into account that some stolen IP cannot be turned into products, making the loss in these instances zero. In other cases, however, the victim company suffers revenue losses for years to come. Chinese companies are getting an illegal ¡°subsidy¡±; they can spend less on R&D, since they can access U.S. research. The range of Chinese economic espionage, from simple household goods like wooden furniture and house paint to the most advanced high-tech products, is part of the explanation for China¡¯s rapid growth.Cyber espionage accounts for a majority (but not all) of IP theft. To summarize how we arrived at this figure, the United States lost roughly $100 billion annually to cyber crime in the decade before the Barack Obama–Xi Jinping agreement renouncing commercial cyber espionage. Roughly a third of this was due to IP theft (the other two-thirds reflect losses from financial crime and recovery costs). China accounts for a majority of economic cyber espionage against the United States (perhaps three-quarters of the losses are from Chinese spying).For some companies, the cost of Chinese IP theft can be fatal (when combined with other business problems). There is also an effect on employment. Research by the International Trade Administration and the European Union found that that $1 billion in exports created roughly 6,000 jobs. Chinese IP theft reduced U.S. exports, meaning the United States could have lost thousands of jobs annually. ¡°Lost¡± is an inaccurate term, since the ¡°net¡± employment loss can be smaller if workers displaced by IP theft find other jobs. But these new positions can pay less, since IP theft can shift employment away from high-paying jobs.China has sought to acquire U.S. technology by any means, licit or illicit, since Deng Xiaoping opened China to the West. Espionage and theft were part of this, but so were forced technology transfers or mandatory joint ventures as a condition for doing business in China. China¡¯s development in automotive, aircraft, information technology, high-speed trains, and defense industries all benefitted from espionage. Many U.S. companies yielded to these forced transfers, calculating that the immediate benefit of access to China¡¯s market outweighs the eventual loss. After 30 years, those chickens have come home to roost.Companies also calculated that they could shield their most valuable technologies and that the technologies would have moved to a new generation by the time the Chinese were able to enter the market. These strategies were partially successful, but they worked better when China was less developed. Now that it is the second-largest economy in the world, what was tolerable before is no longer acceptable.Sometimes you hear the arguments that the United States stole technology in the nineteenth century when it was growing and that China is only doing the same. But these arguments are feeble, and those who make them are feebleminded. In the nineteenth century, it was possible to steal a book, but with digital technologies, you can steal the entire library. The United States was a net contributor to the world stock of knowledge in the nineteenth century, and its innovations spread to other countries, given the absence of international IP protections. In the nineteenth century, countries recognized that inadequate protection for IP hurt global economic growth and disincentivized innovation (people invest less in innovation when their work can simply be stolen). In response, they created a series of agreements to protect IP and trade in the international market. China routinely ignores these agreements, subsidizing its own growth at the cost of global innovation. China has become a country that can innovate, but it is unwilling to give up the crutch of economic espionage and will never do so unless it is pressed.We can take issue with the style of this administration in confronting China (a more astute strategy would not begin by alienating key allies), and we can worry that it has not thought carefully about how to deal with the inevitable Chinese retaliation or how to construct a path for China and the United States to come to a new accord on trade. China will not change its behavior absent external pressure, and pushing back against the constant drain from Chinese IP theft is long overdue.The above writer, James Andrew Lewis, is a senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. He can be contacted at jalewis@csis.org
Related Articles China Unveils its 1st Long-Term Hydrogen Plan Filling In the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework Five Things to Watch in 2022 Is China Building a New String of Pearls in ... China Ramping Up Its Electronic Warfare, ... A New Chapter in U.S.-China LNG Relations Previewing the 2021 Summit for Democracy China: The Growing Military Challenge: Volume ... The Case for US-Japan-ROK Cooperation on ... China's Commitment to Stop Overseas Financing ... China Headaches for Iran Nuclear Deal The Quad's Strategic Infrastructure Play China, Again and Again and Again Engaging China on Climate before COP26 When Will the United States Have a Special ... Is Latin America Important to China's Foreign ... Chinese National Oil Companies Face the Energy ... Four Years On: An Update on Rohingya Crisis 11th Annual South China Sea Conference: ... A Glimpse of Chinese Ballistic Missile ... US Defense Chief Austin Accomplishes Two ... China¡¯s New National Carbon Trading Market: ... Progress Report on China¡¯s Type 003 Carrier Geopolitical Implications of Scientific ... China¡¯s Third Aircraft Carrier Takes Shape Strategic Competition and Foreign Perceptions ... Bonny Lin, Ex-RAND Scientist, to Join CSIS Beyond Polysilicon: The Ties between China¡¯s ... Biden-Moon Summit: Rejuvenating and ... S. Korean President Moon Jae-In to Meet with ... China¡¯s New Space Station Is a Stepping-Stone ... Future Scenarios for Leadership Succession
in ... How China Affects Global Maritime Connectivity What Do Overseas Visits Reveal about China¡¯s ... CSIS Commission on the Korean Peninsula: ... Reflections on the 10th Anniversary of the ... Understanding China¡¯s 2021 Defense Budget China¡¯s Opaque Shipyards Should Raise Red ... How Developed Is China¡¯s Arms Industry? Myanmar¡¯s Military Seizes Power A Complex Inheritance: Transitioning to a New ... Combatting Human Rights Abuses in Xinjiang How Covid-19 Affected US-China Military ... Previewing the G-20 and APEC Summits Another US-Built Facility at Ream Bites the ... Vietnam Currency Investigation: Strategy and ... CSIS Press Briefing: U.S. Policy toward Taiwan Mapping the Future of U.S. China Policy Assessing the Direction of South Korea-Japan ... Chinese Investment in the Maldives: Appraising ... Dual Circulation and China¡¯s New Hedged ... Shinzo Abe¡¯s Decision to Step Down A Frozen Line in the Himalayas Addressing Forced Labor in the Xinjiang Uyghur ... Decoupling Kabuki: Japan¡¯s Effort to Reset, ... Remote Control: Japan's Evolving Senkakus ... Sil-li Ballistic Missile Support Facility China Won¡¯t Be Scared into Choosing ... What¡¯s on the Horizon for Covid-19 Next Steps for the Coronavirus Response COVID-19 Threatens Global Food Security Geopolitics and the Novel Coronavirus Hope for the Climate The Novel Coronavirus Outbreak What's Inside the US-China Phase One Deal? When Iran Attacks Ports and Partnerships: Delhi Invests in ... Seeking Clues in Case of the Yuemaobinyu 42212 Signaling Sovereignty: Chinese Patrols at ... Red Flags: Why Was China¡¯s Fourth Plenum ... Japan and Korea: Rising Above the Fray Only US Can Pull Japan, Korea Back from Brink China Risks Flare-Up over Malaysian, ... Fear Won¡¯t Stop China¡¯s Digital Silk Road Japan, N. Korea: Summit, Missiles, Abductions ¡°Chinese, Russian Influence in the Middle ... Tracking China¡¯s 3rd Aircraft Carrier CSIS Scholars Discuss Trump-Abe Summit Still Under Pressure: Manila Vs. the Militia Is North Korea Preparing for a Military Parade? Slow and Steady: Vietnam's Spratly Upgrades Sanctions against North Korea: An Unintended ... More Is Possible Now to Address North Korea¡¯s ... North Korea Reportedly Renews Commitment to ... Settling Kurdish Self-Determination in ... The Trump Administration¡¯s Trade Objectives ... How Is China Securing Its LNG Needs? Responding to the Xinjiang Surveillance State ... Rethinking U.S. Strategy in the Pacific Islands Will the Election Results Turn the Tide on ... China, US Choose Between 4 ¡°Cs¡± Conflict, ... Shinzo Abe Rolls On Necessary Counterterrorism Conversations Trade and Wages North Korea Begins Dismantling Key Facilities ... Negotiating the Right Agreement: Looking ... The Korean Civil-Military Balance Will Trump-Kim Summit Be Cancelled? The Chinese Are Coming! The Chinese Are Coming! The Other Side of N. Korean Threat: Looking ... The Other Side of the North Korean, Iranian, ... CSIS & Syracuse's Maxwell School Offer ... Dr. Sue Mi Terry Joins CSIS as Senior Fellow ... EU to Social Media: Regulate or Be Regulated Japan¡¯s Lower House Election: Abe Prevails ... China and Technology: Tortoise and Hare Again "Countering Coercion in Maritime Asia"
back
|
|
|
|
|