Trump-Xi Meeting October 2025: No Deal Signed, Only Empty Promises

October 30, 2025 - Another high-profile meeting between the world's two largest economies ends with verbal commitments and zero binding agreements

The highly anticipated meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping concluded today in South Korea with exactly what skeptics predicted: handshakes, photo opportunities, and a list of verbal promises that aren't worth the paper they're not written on.

After approximately one hour and forty minutes of closed-door discussions on the sidelines of the APEC summit, the two leaders emerged without a single signed document, no joint statement, and no public appearance together. What we got instead was Trump declaring victory from Air Force One and Beijing maintaining strategic silence.

If you're an investor trying to gauge the real impact of this meeting on markets, here's the bottom line up front: nothing concrete changed. The fundamental tensions remain. The structural issues are unresolved. And the pattern of promising future action while avoiding present commitment continues unabated.

What Actually Happened: The Timeline

The meeting took place in South Korea during the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting. Trump and Xi met privately for approximately 100 minutes. There was no signing ceremony. There were no prepared remarks to the press. No joint communiqué.

Instead, Trump spoke to reporters aboard Air Force One after the meeting, delivering what can only be described as a greatest-hits compilation of vague commitments and unilateral declarations.

Trump's Announcements: Unilateral Actions and Future Promises

Let's break down what Trump actually said, because the distinction between what's enforceable and what's aspirational matters enormously.

Tariff Reductions (Unilateral U.S. Actions): Trump announced he would reduce tariffs on Chinese fentanyl-related imports from 20% to 10%, effective immediately. He also stated that overall tariffs on Chinese goods would drop from 57% to 47%.

Here's the critical detail: these are unilateral U.S. decisions. Trump can implement these reductions without China's agreement because they're American tariffs on Chinese goods. China doesn't need to sign anything for this to happen. This isn't an "agreement" - it's a policy adjustment Trump controls entirely.

Rare Earth Elements: Trump claimed the rare earth issue has been "solved" and that China agreed not to impose export restrictions for one year. This sounds significant given China's dominance in rare earth production and previous threats to weaponize these critical materials.

But here's the problem: where's the written commitment? Rare earth export controls are a matter of Chinese domestic policy. They can change this position tomorrow morning with zero legal consequences because there's no binding agreement requiring otherwise.

Soybean Purchases: Trump announced China would immediately resume purchases of American soybeans after months of boycotting U.S. agricultural products. For U.S. farmers devastated by the trade tensions, this sounds like welcome news.

Again, the issue: "immediately" means what, exactly? What volume? Over what timeframe? Subject to what conditions? These details matter enormously for actual market impact, and they're entirely absent from Trump's announcement.

The Beijing Visit: Trump stated he would visit Beijing in April 2026. A symbolic gesture of warming relations, perhaps. But state visits don't resolve structural economic conflicts.

Trump's Self-Assessment: When asked to rate the meeting's success, Trump gave it a "12 out of 10." He declared "we have a deal" but immediately qualified this by saying it would be signed "pretty soon" and would be "renegotiated every year."

Let that sink in: "We have a deal" that will be signed "pretty soon" (no specific date) and will need to be "renegotiated every year" (meaning it's not actually settling anything permanently).

What This Means for Markets

So what should traders and investors actually do with this information?

Short-term: Expect disappointment, or at best, muted reaction. Markets likely already priced in optimism heading into this meeting based on pre-summit speculation. Now that the reality is clear—no signed agreements, no concrete commitments, just more promises—that optimism has nowhere to go but down. The initial "relief rally" from avoiding immediate escalation will be short-lived once traders digest what actually didn't happen today.

Medium-term: Uncertainty just got worse, not better. At least when tensions are clearly escalating, businesses can plan for the worst. This ambiguous middle ground where verbal promises float without written commitments creates paralysis. Supply chain managers can't make decisions. CFOs can't forecast with confidence. And every earnings call will include the same qualifier: "subject to trade policy developments." That's not a foundation for growth; it's a recipe for cautious capital allocation and delayed investment.

Long-term: Nothing—and I mean nothing—was resolved today regarding the structural competition between the U.S. and China. Intellectual property theft continues. Forced technology transfer continues. State subsidies distorting markets continue. The semiconductor war continues. The battle for AI supremacy continues. Today's handshake didn't even pause these conflicts; it just provided cover to pretend they're being addressed.

Sector-specific reality check:

Agricultural commodities might see a brief bump on the soybean news, but remember: China has made and broken promises about agricultural purchases before. The Phase One deal purchasing commitments were never met, and there were actual signatures on that document. Why should we believe verbal promises will fare better?

Rare earth stocks could move on speculation, but the lack of written commitment means China can reverse course the moment it becomes politically convenient. These are national security assets for Beijing—verbal assurances are worthless when strategic interests are at stake.

Companies dependent on lower tariff rates are celebrating reductions Trump controls unilaterally, which means he can reverse them just as easily. There's no Chinese agreement preventing him from raising them again next month if he decides he needs leverage for something else.

The Real Issue: Nothing Was Solved, And Now We're Pretending Otherwise

Here's the uncomfortable truth that markets will eventually be forced to confront: none of the fundamental issues dividing the U.S. and China were resolved today. Worse, both sides are now operating under the fiction that "progress" was made, which delays any actual attempt to address real problems.

China's state-directed capitalism model isn't changing. America's concerns about technology transfer aren't being addressed. The race for dominance in semiconductors, AI, and advanced manufacturing continues at full throttle. The geopolitical powder kegs of Taiwan and the South China Sea remain unchanged.

What happened today was theater designed to postpone difficult decisions, not a serious attempt at resolution. It's worse than a ceasefire—it's a pretend ceasefire where both armies remain fully mobilized and pointed at each other.

The "Pretty Soon" Problem

Trump's statement that an agreement would be signed "pretty soon" isn't just vague—it's a red flag.

"Pretty soon" in diplomatic language typically translates to one of three scenarios:

1. "We couldn't agree on critical details today and may never"
2. "We'll sign something when it's politically convenient, which may not align with economic reality"
3. "This will quietly die and we'll hope everyone forgets we promised it"

None of these scenarios are bullish for markets seeking clarity.

Until there's a signed document with specific commitments, enforcement mechanisms, timelines, and consequences for non-compliance, there is no deal. There are only press releases masquerading as progress.

Why This Is Worse Than Clear Escalation

Here's a contrarian take: clear escalation would actually be better for markets than this ambiguous limbo.

When tariffs are definitely going up, businesses adjust. They find alternative suppliers, relocate production, or pass costs to consumers. When military tensions are clearly rising, defense budgets increase and alliances solidify. When trade barriers are definitively being erected, companies and investors adapt to the new reality.

But this? This perpetual state of "maybe things will improve, maybe they won't" creates paralysis. Capital sits on the sidelines. Investment decisions get postponed. Strategic planning becomes impossible because nobody knows what the rules will be six months from now.

Markets can handle bad news. Markets struggle with uncertainty that masquerades as good news.

The Pattern Recognition Problem

For anyone paying attention to U.S.-China relations over the past eight years, today's meeting follows a depressingly familiar script:

1. Tensions escalate
2. High-level meeting announced
3. Optimism builds pre-meeting
4. Meeting produces verbal commitments
5. Markets briefly rally
6. Verbal commitments prove unenforceable or get abandoned
7. Return to step 1

We're currently somewhere between steps 4 and 5. Steps 6 and 7 are inevitable because the structural issues haven't been addressed. The only question is timing.

Conclusion: Lower Your Expectations Further

For investors navigating U.S.-China tensions, today's meeting should be filed under "wasted opportunity" rather than "tactical maneuvering."

The optimistic spin would be: at least they're talking. The realistic assessment is: talking without doing is worse than not talking at all, because it creates false hope and delays necessary adjustments to reality.

Don't confuse diplomatic theater with substantive progress. Don't mistake verbal promises for binding commitments. And definitely don't assume that because two leaders shook hands and posed for cameras, any of the fundamental conflicts have moved one inch closer to resolution.

The realistic read on today's events is this: we got promises to be documented "pretty soon" (translation: maybe never), unilateral actions Trump can reverse tomorrow, and strategic silence from Beijing that preserves their flexibility to deny or reinterpret everything Trump claimed was agreed.

That's not a breakthrough. That's not even a press release. That's a photo opportunity with a futures expiration date.

For traders, the message is stark: Any rally based on today's "progress" is a selling opportunity, not a buying signal. The fundamental uncertainties remain unresolved and are arguably worse now because both sides can claim progress while doing nothing. Verbal promises from either Washington or Beijing should be assigned zero value in your risk models until they're backed by signed documents with enforcement mechanisms.

The U.S.-China trade conflict will continue generating market volatility and geopolitical instability for years. Today's meeting didn't change that trajectory—it just provided another data point confirming that neither side is serious about actual resolution. They're serious about appearing to try while preserving their ability to blame the other side when nothing improves.

Position accordingly.

Welcome to Nardaggio. Let's separate signal from noise.

Disclaimer

This content is for informational and educational purposes only. Nothing in this article constitutes financial, investment, legal, or tax advice.

I am not a registered financial advisor. I do not know your financial situation, risk tolerance, investment objectives, or time horizon. The strategies and positions discussed here reflect my personal approach and should not be interpreted as recommendations for you to follow.

Markets are inherently risky. Trading futures, options, and leveraged instruments can result in significant losses, including losses exceeding your initial investment. Past performance—mine or anyone else's—does not guarantee future results.

Do your own research. Consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. Any action you take based on information in this article is strictly at your own risk.

CODERA LAB LTD and the author assume no liability for any losses or damages resulting from the use of this information.