China's new trade offer looks generous. But SA must learn from the past
Chinese authorities may lower import tariffs for various goods from African countries. But SA needs to draw appropriate lessons from experience, says Wandile Sihlobo.
South Africa's agricultural export focus means the country must always keep an open eye for any potential new market expansion. One country that has consistently been on our radar is China. The country's dominance in global agricultural imports, stable economy, large population, and current low penetration by South Africa's agriculture make it an ideal area for expansion.
However, the nonexistence of a preferential trade agreement in agricultural products has disadvantaged South Africa relative to its competitors, such as Australia, Peru, and Chile, among others, which access the Chinese market at a tariff-free rate or with low tariffs.
It is against this backdrop that we found the official announcement by the Chinese authorities that they would consider lowering import tariffs for various goods from African countries encouraging.
While no official details have been released yet, we view the message as consistent with what the official representatives of the People's Republic of China have been communicating, particularly regarding agriculture. For example, in April, Wu Peng, current Chinese Ambassador to South Africa, stated that '…China and South Africa need to strengthen our bilateral trade and economic cooperation. Chinese government welcomes more South African agricultural and industrial products to enter the huge Chinese market.'
China's signalling the willingness to absorb more South African agricultural products is only the first step in what will likely be a long journey, as trade matters generally take time. Ideally, the following steps should be a clear and pragmatic plan for reducing import tariffs and removing phytosanitary barriers that certain agricultural products continue to encounter in the Chinese market. Indeed, the work must be led by South Africa's Department of Trade, Industry, and Competition, as well as the Department of Agriculture, and at specific points, also the Department of International Relations and Cooperation. This will help ensure that China proceeds beyond statements to actual business collaboration.
South Africa remains a small share in the Chinese list of agricultural suppliers, at about 0.4%. However, this current access in China is vital for the wool and red meat industry. China accounts for roughly 70% of South Africa's wool exports. There is a progressive increase in red meat exports, even though animal diseases currently cause glitches. The focus should be on expanding this access by lowering duties and other non-tariff barriers to encourage more fruit, grain, and other product exports to China.
Still, it is essential to emphasise that the focus on China is not at the expense of existing agricultural export markets and relationships. Instead, China offers an opportunity to continue with export diversification. As we stated recently, the Trade Map data show that China is among the world's leading agricultural importers, accounting for 9% of global agricultural imports in 2024 (before 2024, China had been a leading importer for many years).
The US was the world's leading agricultural importer in the same year, accounting for 10% of global imports. Germany accounted for 7%, followed by the UK (4%), the Netherlands (4%), France (4%), Italy (3%), Japan (3%), Belgium (3%) and Canada (2%). It is this diversity of agricultural demand in global markets that convinces us that South Africa's agricultural trade interests cannot be limited to one country but should be spread across all major agricultural importers.
Importantly, the approach of promoting diversity and maintaining access to various regions has been a key component of South Africa's agricultural trade policy since the dawn of democracy. For example, in 2024, South Africa exported a record $13.7 billion of agricultural products, up 3% from the previous year. These exports were spread across the diverse regions.
The African continent accounted for the lion's share of South Africa's agricultural exports, with a 44% share of the total value.
As a collective, Asia and the Middle East were the second-largest agricultural markets, accounting for 21% of the share of overall farm exports. The EU was South Africa's third-largest agricultural market, accounting for a 19% share of the market. The Americas region accounted for 6% of South Africa's agricultural exports in 2024. The rest of the world, including the United Kingdom, accounted for 10% of the exports.
In a nutshell, China's signalling the willingness to lower import tariffs is a welcome development. However, it will only become more substantial once more information becomes available. From a South African side, the relevant government departments should consider, through the local Embassy, sending an enquiry about unlocking this process.
Ultimately, China is one of the focus areas in South Africa's long-term agricultural export diversification strategy, and any opportunity to further this plan should be pursued vigorously.
Importantly, while China's offer looks generous, a country like South Africa needs to draw appropriate lessons from experience.
Unilateral duty-free, quota-free market access is a double-edged sword: in the short to medium term, they can help a country increase the share of its exports in a significant market, but since these are not anchored in reciprocity, the largesse can disappear if there are frictions between the two parties, for example, over geopolitics.
In short, non-reciprocal arrangements can lead to dependence and can easily be exploited by the benefactor as a means of political leverage to achieve strategic ends.
While South Africa—and indeed African countries—should take advantage of this opportunity, we must aim to conclude a bilateral trade agreement with China that guarantees predictability and certainty and is durable.
Wandile Sihlobo is chief economist of the Agricultural Business Chamber of South Africa (Agbiz).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ex-ambassador to Russia: Putin, Xi will celebrate Trump's ‘preemptive war' in Iran
Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul warned on Saturday of how U.S. strikes on Iran could influence U.S. adversaries around the world. In an interview on MSNBC, McFaul said Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping would be glad to see the U.S. engaging in 'preemptive' strikes. 'I think we've really got to understand our other interests in the world that might be affected by this attack today. This is a preemptive war. The world does not support preemptive wars. We learned that in 2003,' McFaul said, referring to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which was launched based on the theory that Saddam Hussein's regime had weapons of mass destruction and threatened America. 'Putin will be celebrating this because he did his own preemptive war in Ukraine and now it's like, well, this is just what great powers do. Maybe Xi Jinping is going to think the same. He's going to say, 'Well, if they can do it here, we can do it in Taiwan,'' McFaul added. Trump announced on Saturday evening that the U.S. had bombed three Iranian nuclear sites and said, 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!' McFaul, in the interview, said he wishes the president 'well' in his aim to bring about peace, saying that outcome is possible but not likely. 'I hope he can bring about an agreement as soon as possible. It's happened before — capitulation after an attack like this — so it could happen, but it's not what I'm predicting,' McFaul said. 'The idea that they will now sit down and negotiate with us some long-term deal in the immediate run, I think, is highly unlikely,' he added. McFaul said it's 'good news' that the U.S. strikes, according to Trump, 'totally obliterated' the Iranian nuclear facilities, saying, 'I applaud that.' 'That's good news for today, but we need to think about what are the first, second, third and fourth order consequences after this,' McFaul added. 'Most immediately, they are going to retaliate, and I hope we are prepared to prevent that and prevail against our forces in the region.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Nike's Brand is Strong, But Pressures Are Mounting
Few would dispute that Nike (NYSE:NKE) remains one of the most iconic brands in athletic fashion, with a track record of defining culture, bringing impressive levels of innovation, and delivering at scale globally. However, 2025 is proving to be a challenging year for many of the world's largest retailers, with mounting pressures from geopolitical tensions, rising threats to supply chains, and uncertain trading conditions. I see shares in the company trading close to fair value, so while Nike is likely going nowhere any time soon, the catalysts that have made it investible over the last few decades are not really working for now. One of the most instantly recognisable brands in the world, Nike has been designing, marketing and selling athletic footwear, clothing, and equipment since 1964. It generally operates across direct to consumer sales channels, delivering just over $50 billion in revenue in FY24. Net margins during this period were a solid 9%, well above the median average of peers at 5%. However, there will be concerns that this growth appears to be faltering, with the share price down over 35% in a year, forward revenues expected to drop by 4%, and EPS sliding 16%. Following the events of the pandemic, a shift towards direct to consumer business was meant to deliver premium margins and a closer relationship with customers. Although there were signs in previous quarters that this was developing, the wider economic landscape globally has taken a significant toll on the balance sheet. Rising costs in logistics, weakening demand, and discounting from competitors have all hit margins more than management would have liked to see. With so much of the company's logistics network in China, Vietnam and Indonesia, the recent tariff tensions have put enormous stress on the profitability analysts are expecting over the coming years, with some suggesting that as much as [url="]95[/url]% of profits could be at risk in the worst case scenario. Of course, Nike is not the only company dealing with this landscape, but with newer brands amassing loyal followings from social media and more dynamic brand campaigns, firms such as Lululemon are seeing surges in key markets, such as women-led athleisure. Nike is clearly making moves to correct this, with a partnership with [url="]Skims[/url] likely to roll out in 2026, but it suggests that the firm is perhaps on the backfoot with these emerging trends. That said, there is enormous strength in the Nike brand, with a track record of cash-generation, innovative campaigns, and huge deals with athletes such as LeBron James and Kylian Mbappe. From an investor perspective, the 2.7% dividend yield adds a decent level of appeal alongside a strong balance sheet, especially in a period of market transition where some of these newcomers appear to be losing share even faster than some of the more established players. From my perspective, the real weakness comes from relatively weak momentum and a rather expensive valuation. With a forward P/E sitting at about 31x, EV/EBITDA at 16x and P/S at about 2x, the company's key metrics are at a decent premium despite not necessarily having the growth to justify them. Following the latest Q4 earnings report, which indicated that inventory clearance is underway, many analysts have slashed expectations, with management forecasting revenue decline of between 8-10%. Digging into the valuation, I've developed a discounted cash flow (DCF) model based on the following inputs: Terminal growth: 2.5% based on industry, WACC: 8% based on industry and peers, Revenue CAGR 5Y: 2%, EBIT Margin: approx. 11%. With these assumptions applied, a fair value of shares comes to about $52 per share. This can be closer to $62 in a more optimistic scenario where top line growth exceeds 5%, and with 13-14% margins, but even in this case, I'd not expect to see much more than 10% returns for investors in the across the market to peers with slightly more appealing valuations, such as Adidas with P/E of 15x, I feel that it is hard to get excited about this premium as a new investor. Of course, there are plenty of reasons to justify both perspectives, and the divided ratings from Wall Street reflect this well. With 63% of analysts now appearing to be behind Buy or Strong Buy ratings, and 35% holding neutral ratings, I appear to be in the relative minority on the bearish side of the spectrum. Recent upgrades in the Nike coverage from analysts match this, with about 23 upward revisions for EPS guidance, and just 4 downgrades, suggesting that cost control and potential products reflect opportunities looking ahead. That said, top-line expectations for revenue forecasts have been much more negative. From my perspective, I have my eye on the next earnings report on June 27th. Investors will be keen to understand the latest inventory levels and strategy for approaching markdowns going forward, but mostly will look to the trend in gross margins. I'd also want to see some more promising performance, particularly in the critical Chinese market, and hear some progress towards new innovations which will keep investors on-side. Investors will likely want to hear exactly where margin targets are landing for management, and the response being taken to fierce competition across multiple sectors. By no means is the investor thesis for Nike broken, but I fear that it is nowhere near as strong as the valuation may justify. It is still an elite brand across multiple markets, with strong profitability and operational discipline during a volatile period. However, I feel that it is far from an automatic pick for investors at present, with growth looking uncertain, and a valuation which leaves little room for error. Investors may be rewarded for patience at this stage, especially if innovation and cost control works out in a negative market backdrop, but I suspect there may be safer opportunities elsewhere. Until management are able to present tangible evidence that revenue is accelerating, and that the brand is moving ahead of leaner competitors, I'll be keeping my distance. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
South African engineers freed after two years in Equatorial Guinea jail
Two South African engineers have returned home after spending more than two years in jail in Equatorial Guinea on what the UN has called "arbitrary and illegal" drugs charges. Frik Potgieter and Peter Huxham, both in their mid-50s, were arrested in February 2023 after drugs were allegedly found in their luggage. They were sentenced to 12 years in prison and fined $5m (£4m) but have been given a presidential pardon after a long campaign by their families and the South African government. Their arrest came days after luxury assets belonging to Equatorial Guinea's Vice-President Teodoro Nguema Obiang were seized in South Africa. A yacht and two Cape Town villas belonging to Obiang, who is also the son of Equatorial Guinea's president, were impounded in execution of a court ruling. "We are overwhelmed with relief and joy. The last two years and four months have been unimaginably painful for both of our families," according to a statement released by the two men's families. They were working for the Dutch oil and gas company SBM in Equatorial Guinea when they arrested the night before they were due to return home after a five-week stint in the country. The families had called for the assistance of the South African government as well as that of the UK government, as Mr Huxham has dual nationality. "South Africa expresses its sincere gratitude to the Government of Equatorial Guinea for considering and ultimately granting this Presidential pardon, allowing Mr Huxham and Mr Potgieter to return home to their loved ones," said a post on X by South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention last year called for the pair's release, saying their detention was unlawful. Their families say the pair were arrested in retaliation for the seizure of the assets belonging to Equatorial Guinea's vice-president. The BBC has contacted Equatorial Guinea for comment. A South African official told the BBC it was for the courts to decide the fate of the yacht and villas, and the government couldn't intervene. Equatorial Guinea VP's superyacht and homes seized in South Africa The president's son who loves Bugattis and Michael Jackson World's longest-serving president to continue 43-year-rule Go to for more news from the African continent. Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica Focus on Africa
