Sinica · China
TIER 4 Sun, 7 Jun 2026 16:13:11 +0000
When most people think of China's export controls, they think of dual-use controls -- the dramatic, headline-grabbing restrictions on critical mineral products like gallium, graphite, and most famously, rare earths.
͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
| |
---|---|---
| | | Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more
When most people think of China 's export controls, they think of dual-use controls -- the dramatic, headline-grabbing restrictions on critical mineral products like gallium, graphite, and most famously, rare earths.
But there 's a parallel, less headline-grabbing export control system that rarely makes the news.
The details: The paper -- titled "Framework and Empirical Study on the Selection Framework of Export-Restricted Technology in the China-U.S. Technology Landscape" -- was published in March by researchers from four of China's leading government-affiliated science and engineering institutes.
To be clear, this is a technical research paper; it is not official government policy.
But in China's Political system, research like this doesn't get published unless leadership wants options on the table.
We therefore expect it to directly inform the highest levels of debate on export control strategy.
To understand why this matters, it helps to understand the distinct purposes that China 's parallel export control systems serve.
The first system is the one that makes headlines: The dual-use export control system, established under the 2020 Export Control Law.
The second is far less well known: The industrial technology restriction system, which has been quietly operating since 2001.
Governed by a document called the Catalogue of Technologies Prohibited or Restricted from Export, this system manages civilian technologies -- process know-how, licensing, and technical transfers -- wherever they are relevant to China's industrial competitiveness.
Think advanced cathode production, high-value crop breeding techniques, and cutting-edge metallurgy.
Critically, most technologically advanced economies, including the U.S., have similar mechanisms.
This is routine industrial policy, not economic warfare.
The new research focuses entirely on the second system -- and its diagnosis is blunt.
China's management of the Catalogue is, in the authors' own words, "weak."
The system is opaque, slow, and more reactive than strategic.
That was perhaps acceptable when China was still catching up technologically. But it is no longer acceptable now that China has become a global leader in frontier technologies -- and faces what the authors describe as "systemic suppression" and "comprehensive containment" from the West.
The solution the researchers propose is a structured, three-test framework for deciding which technologies should be restricted -- explicitly modelled on how the U.S. manages its own technology export controls.
Under the proposed framework, a technology earns a place on the restricted list only if it clears all three tests.
Necessity: Is the technology strategically important to China, and does China genuinely lead the world in it? Both must be true.
Feasibility: Is the technology mature enough to actually control, and can buyers not easily source it elsewhere? Again, both must hold.
Impact: Would restricting it cost China more than its rivals in lost innovation, jobs, or trade?
It is a rigorous framework that prioritizes leverage over reflexive protectionism. A technology only gets restricted if China actually leads in it, if the restriction is enforceable, and if the costs to China are manageable.
In a pilot implementation, the researchers identified 63 technologies where China either leads or is contending for global leadership.
So could the results of this pilot indicate how Beijing will govern future industrial technology export controls, as it looks to lock in future industrial advantages?
First, the pilot was incomplete.
Recall that the three-test framework requires each technology to clear three hurdles: necessity (strategic importance to China plus Chinese global leadership), feasibility (technological maturity plus limited substitutability elsewhere), and impact (net cost to China of imposing controls).
In the pilot, the researchers could not assess substitutability or impact due to time and data limitations.
That means the 63 technologies identified are not a rank-ordered menu of proposed new controls, even by the authors' own standards.
Second, it 's critical to note that the logic under which the researchers propose this framework -- preserving China's industrial competitive advantages -- is fundamentally different from the logic that drives China's retaliatory dual-use controls on critical minerals.
Those latter controls are geopolitical weapons, and their use is assessed on the basis of a given material's strategic importance to other countries, often as a form of retaliation.
That means anyone trying to predict what comes next in China's retaliatory toolkit should not be reading this research as a guide.
But what the research does tell us is something genuinely important: China's approach to protecting its industrial technology base is being rethought from the ground up.
That means, while this research is not a list of controls to come, it is a serious public signal that the governance logic underpinning China's industrial technology export controls is changing -- and that the 63 technologies identified by China 's own experts as areas of strength are exactly where foreign companies and governments should be paying attention.
Cory Combs, Head of Supply Chains and Critical Minerals Research, Trivium China
On May 30, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegsethdelivered a speech at the Shangri-la Dialogue (SLD) in Singapore.
On Tuesday, the office of the U.S. Trade Representative (U.S.TR)announced the results of its Section 301 investigation into the alleged failure of 60 U.S. trade partners to prevent the import of products made with forced labor -- with China being subject to a 12.5% tariff rate as a result.
On Thursday, EU Trade CommissionerMaroš Šefčovič met with China's top trade negotiator Li Chenggang in Paris.
On Tuesday, British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper kicked offa three-day visit to China.
Beijing is massivelyunderestimating the scale of local government hidden debt.
In May, local governments issued RMB 141 billion worth of infrastructure special-purpose bonds (SPBs), down 59.1% y/y, marking the third consecutive month of decline.
SAIC -- China's second-largest automaker -- is building a EUR 200 million auto plant in Galicia, Spain.
China 's listed firms are being forced to pay back taxes -- so far in 2026, 69 listed companies have disclosed that they owe back taxes, totaling over RMB 4.9 billion.
Cleaning up the myriad local government tax breaks will help weed out the unproductive overcapacity that bedevils many sectors.
However, a government retroactively demanding money from firms will not help business confidence.
China has established its first comprehensivenational framework for overseeing outbound direct investment (ODI), replacing a patchwork of lower-level ministerial rules.
The State Council published the 15th Five-Year Plan (FYP) forAccelerating Agricultural and Rural Modernization on Tuesday.
On Tuesday, the Party 's disciplinary commission (CCDI) announced that Li Xiaohong, former head of the office of the Central Leading Group for Inspection Work, is under investigation for "serious violations of discipline and law."
As former head of the office of the CCDI, Li ran the machine that drove then-CCDI head Wang Qishan's anti-corruption campaign between 2012 and 2017.
Our question: Is the net closing in on Wang Qishan himself?
As always, it was a busy week in China.
You 're currently a free subscriber to Sinica. Please support the work that I'm doing and upgrade to paid. 非常感谢！
Upgrade to paid
(C) 2026 The Sinica Podcast
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104
Unsubscribe