Xi-Trump summit drew Chinese CEOs. So why couldn't they get a seat at the table?

By SCMP

• Published Sep 30, 2026 3:10 PM KST

Of 134 guests at White House state dinner, only 19 were part of the Chinese delegation

As American billionaires gathered at the White House to honor Chinese President Xi Jinping and his wife Peng Liyuan last Thursday, a group of Chinese business leaders spent the evening on the sidelines.

They had travelled to the U.S. capital to join the state dinner. But their invitations never arrived.

For weeks, their participation was the subject of intense discussion between Washington and Beijing.

While it was under consideration until the summit’s final hours, they were ultimately excluded due to poor communication between the two governments, the two sides’ differing views on reciprocity and the White House’s unclear attitude towards Chinese investments in the United States, according to multiple sources.

More than 130 high-profile guests attended the dinner, including some of America’s most prominent tycoons.

Several were seated at the main table alongside the leaders and first ladies, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, Advanced Micro Devices CEO Lisa Su and Apple executive chairman Tim Cook.

Of the 134 guests, only 19 were part of the Chinese delegation.

This was in sharp contrast to Trump’s May state visit to Beijing, where the U.S. delegation featured Musk, Cook, Huang, and David Solomon from Goldman Sachs. They attended several events and meetings, including the banquet at the Great Hall of the People.

The South China Morning Post first reported in August that Chinese and U.S. officials were discussing the possibility of business leaders joining Xi’s delegation.

Figures from some of China’s most prominent firms — including electric vehicle maker BYD, battery maker Contemporary Amperex Technology Limited and smart manufacturing giant Xiaomi — were expected to be part of the Chinese business delegation.

Two sources said that Washington first proposed the idea of inviting Chinese business leaders during the preparations for the summit as a matter of reciprocity — the guiding principle of Xi’s visit — following Trump’s May trip.

The sources added that China accepted the proposal in principle and requested further details from the U.S. regarding planned meetings and official engagements. However, the White House side was slow to address these inquiries.

While frustrated by the delay, the Chinese side told several companies that their executives should be ready to travel to Washington at short notice, the sources said.

Two sources noted that Beijing viewed the lack of communication as evidence of Washington’s reluctance to invite Chinese businesses to the White House.

One source familiar with the matter said the two sides differed over what reciprocity meant in practice.

For Beijing, the American business leaders who accompanied Trump on his May trip were part of the delegation, which set a precedent for Xi’s visit. Washington, however, only wanted to extend this reciprocity to senior government officials, the source said.

The SCMP earlier reported that divergence between Washington and Beijing over potential Chinese investment announcements also created roadblocks for the business delegation’s participation.

A source said that Washington and Beijing remained divided over the Board of Investment, particularly on the terms for potential Chinese investments in the U.S., further casting a cloud over the delegation’s participation.

The investment forum was one of the outcomes from Xi and Trump’s last summit in Beijing.

Another source said the two sides had discussed potential deals that could be announced during Xi’s visit, including one involving Chinese batteries, but the negotiations failed to make headway.

The official accounts released after the summit confirmed the lack of progress. While the U.S. fact sheet repeated its May reference to the investment board, the Chinese read-out made no mention of it.

Washington’s position on Chinese investments in the U.S. — especially in the auto sector — remained unsettled ahead of the summit, with American carmakers and lawmakers increasingly pushing back against the prospect.

Trump, however, said earlier this month that Chinese carmakers could establish manufacturing plants in the U.S. “If China wanted to come in and open a plant to build their cars here, I’d be OK with it,” he told Fox News.

Despite Trump’s openness to the idea, his administration was seeking to address concerns at home as its political base remained divided over Chinese investment in the U.S., a source said.

“In this instance, even Trump could not bend his administration, let alone his party, to his will,” another source added.

Just three days before the visit, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer met Chinese Vice-Premier He Lifeng at JPMorgan’s headquarters in New York to finalise the summit’s deliverables.

Two sources said the issue of the Chinese business delegation came up, but the two sides were unable to reach an agreement.

By that time, the SCMP had already reported that a small group of Chinese CEOs had independently travelled to Washington ahead of Xi’s arrival.

A source familiar with the issue said the group was expected to include representatives of Chinese electric-vehicle companies, which had shown particularly strong interest in investing in the U.S.

Bessent and He discussed the matter again during a second meeting last Wednesday at the World Bank’s offices in Washington, but made no progress, the sources said.

The business leaders’ presence at that stage became a matter of optics rather than substance, according to another source.

While the optics mattered to Beijing, which was unhappy with Washington’s stance, it chose not to press the issue further and risk overshadowing a state visit otherwise marked by pomp and pageantry.

The Chinese business leaders “should’ve come in numbers and attended the state dinner regardless of what they could achieve or not achieve,” a source said.

“It would’ve been a huge soft power coup.”

Read the article at SCMP.