Skip to main content
  • Sections
  • Search

Center for Strategic & International Studies

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Sign In

   Ranked #1 Think Tank in U.S. by Global Go To Think Tank Index

Topics

  • Climate Change
  • Cybersecurity and Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Governance
    • Intelligence, Surveillance, and Privacy
    • Military Technology
    • Space
    • Technology and Innovation
  • Defense and Security
    • Counterterrorism and Homeland Security
    • Defense Budget
    • Defense Industry, Acquisition, and Innovation
    • Defense Strategy and Capabilities
    • Geopolitics and International Security
    • Long-Term Futures
    • Missile Defense
    • Space
    • Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation
  • Economics
    • Asian Economics
    • Global Economic Governance
    • Trade and International Business
  • Energy and Sustainability
    • Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Impacts
    • Energy and Geopolitics
    • Energy Innovation
    • Energy Markets, Trends, and Outlooks
  • Global Health
    • Family Planning, Maternal and Child Health, and Immunizations
    • Multilateral Institutions
    • Health and Security
    • Infectious Disease
  • Human Rights
    • Civil Society
    • Transitional Justice
    • Human Security
  • International Development
    • Food and Agriculture
    • Governance and Rule of Law
    • Humanitarian Assistance
    • Private Sector Development
    • U.S. Development Policy

Regions

  • Africa
    • North Africa
    • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Americas
    • Caribbean
    • North America
    • South America
  • Arctic
  • Asia
    • Afghanistan
    • Australia, New Zealand & Pacific
    • China
    • India
    • Japan
    • Korea
    • Pakistan
    • Southeast Asia
  • Europe
    • European Union
    • NATO
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Turkey
  • Middle East
    • The Gulf
    • Egypt and the Levant
    • North Africa
  • Russia and Eurasia
    • The South Caucasus
    • Central Asia
    • Post-Soviet Europe
    • Russia

Sections menu

  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
    • Blogs
    • Books
    • Commentary
    • Congressional Testimony
    • Critical Questions
    • Interactive Reports
    • Journals
    • Newsletter
    • Reports
    • Transcript
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • Web Projects

Main menu

  • About Us
  • Support CSIS
    • Securing Our Future
Photo: GREG BAKER/AFP via Getty Images
Blog Post - Trustee China Hand
Share
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Printfriendly.com

Show Me the Receipts: China’s Rising IP Payments to the United States

August 19, 2019

Trustee Chair in Chinese Business and Economics > Trustee China Hand 

By Wang Qiuyang, Qiu Mingda and Scott Kennedy
 
On March 22nd, 2018, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) found that China had violated Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 through its various encroachments on American intellectual property (IP). According to the 301 Report, one of China’s offenses was its “regime of technology regulations [that] forces U.S. companies seeking to license technologies to Chinese entities to do so on non-market based terms that favor Chinese recipients.” That conclusion doesn’t take into consideration the detailed data the U.S. Commerce Department maintains on IP fees – licenses and royalties – the United States collects from other countries. An initial review of this data suggests an improvement in Chinese behavior, but is still inconclusive about whether payments from China are actually sufficient and fair to the American IP holders.
 
Figure 1: US Receipt in IP with Selected Countries, 2005-2017 ($ billions)

To China’s credit, the overall data shows that China significantly increased the amount of IP payments to the United States from 2005 to 2017 (see Figure 1). Since 2016 China has been the number-one payee in East Asia. This is significant because it shows a dramatic rise in Chinese payments over the last five years.
 
Figure 2: Percent of Unaffiliated party Receipts to Total Receipts with Select Economies, 2006-2017

 

Another positive sign comes from examining who is paying these fees. Luckily, the U.S. Commerce Department tracks whether payments occur within a companies’ subsidiaries or occurs between different companies (“unaffiliated parties”). Tellingly, a rising share of payments from China are from such “unaffiliated parties.” In 2017 such transactions accounted for more than 60% of the IP payments. Although still lower than Taiwan and South Korea, the rapid upswing in the Chinese figure likely implies a higher level of compliance, particularly as a growing share of high-tech exports are coming from purely domestic Chinese companies. 
 
Figure 3: IP Payments and High-Tech Exports to the United States in 2017

More worrying – or conflicting – is data that tries to guesstimate what an appropriate level of payment would be given a country’s amount of high-tech exports to the United States. Figure 3 charts various economies’ relationship between the proportion of IP payments to the United States coming from any one country and how much these countries contribute to the world’s high-tech exports to the United States. There is no exact relationship between the two for most countries (a level of IP payments isn’t associated with a level of exports), but China is literally almost off the charts, accounting for an outsized contribution of high-tech exports to the U.S., but still paying the same level of fees as just about everyone else. Given the high IP content in high-tech goods, one would expect the figure from China to be higher.
 
Although significant, this data isn’t conclusive, as the figures on China’s high-tech exports to the United States include a substantial amount of value-added contributed by others. Perhaps if the data on high-tech trade were broken down by value-added by country, it might show China less as an outlier, and hence, lending further support to the other data showing a rise in absolute payments and from unaffiliated parties.
 
A firmer conclusion will require more analysis, including more global data, not just US-China bilateral flows. But at least the figures presented here suggest it may be possible to reach a conclusion based on quantitative data, not just informal impressions or anecdotes.

Trustee Chair in Chinese Business and Economics > Trustee China Hand 

Wang Qiuyang was a research intern at CSIS. Qiu Mingda is a research associate with the Freeman Chair in China Studies at CSIS. Scott Kennedy is Senior Adviser and Trustee Chair in Chinese Business and Economics at CSIS.

                                                                         

Written By
  • Twitter
Scott Kennedy
Senior Adviser and Trustee Chair in Chinese Business and Economics
Media Queries

Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Caleb Diamond
Media Relations Manager and Editorial Associate
Tel: 202.775.3173

Related
Asia, Asian Economics, China, Chinese Business and Economics, Technology and Innovation, Trade and International Business, Trustee China Hand

More from this blog

Blog Post
The US and China: Not Number One
By Shining Tan, Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
December 21, 2020
Blog Post
China’s COMAC: An Aerospace Minor Leaguer
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
December 7, 2020
Blog Post
China’s Planners Succeed, but What About China?
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
November 11, 2020
Blog Post
Thunder Out of Congress on China
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
September 11, 2020
Blog Post
The Biggest But Not the Strongest: China’s Place in the Fortune Global 500
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
August 18, 2020
Blog Post
America’s Huawei Challenges
By Scott Kennedy, Shining Tan
In Trustee China Hand
July 31, 2020
Blog Post
American Business Confidence in Hong Kong Sinks
By Shining Tan
In Trustee China Hand
July 22, 2020
Blog Post
Can China’s “Stall Economy” Save Its Stalled Economy?
By Shining Tan
In Trustee China Hand
June 24, 2020

Related Content

Blog Post
Decoupling Between Washington and Western Industry
By Scott Kennedy, Shining Tan
In Trustee China Hand
June 10, 2020
Blog Post
American Business Confidence in Hong Kong Sinks
By Shining Tan
In Trustee China Hand
July 22, 2020
Blog Post
China’s Planners Succeed, but What About China?
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
November 11, 2020
Blog Post
Thunder Out of Congress on China
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
September 11, 2020
Blog Post
China's Military-Civil Fusion Funds: Big but Not Necessarily Effective
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
October 4, 2019
Blog Post
The Biggest But Not the Strongest: China’s Place in the Fortune Global 500
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
August 18, 2020
Blog Post
Chinese Philanthropists Rush to Respond to COVID-19
By Scott Kennedy
In Trustee China Hand
May 4, 2020
Blog Post
Numbers or Perceptions? A Widening Gap in Evaluating China’s Innovation
In Trustee China Hand
July 25, 2019
Footer menu
  • Topics
  • Regions
  • Programs
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Analysis
  • Web Projects
  • Podcasts
  • iDeas Lab
  • Transcripts
  • About Us
  • Support Us
Contact CSIS
Email CSIS
Tel: 202.887.0200
Fax: 202.775.3199
Visit CSIS Headquarters
1616 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Media Queries

Contact H. Andrew Schwartz
Chief Communications Officer
Tel: 202.775.3242

Contact Caleb Diamond
Media Relations Manager and Editorial Associate
Tel: 202.775.3173

Daily Updates

Sign up to receive The Evening, a daily brief on the news, events, and people shaping the world of international affairs.

Subscribe to CSIS Newsletters

Follow CSIS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Instagram

All content © 2020. All rights reserved.

Legal menu
  • Credits
  • Privacy Policy
  • Reprint Permissions