Xi Jinping Arrives in Washington for Sept. 23-25 State Visit, With Trump Summit Set for Sept. 24
Xi's first U.S. state visit since 2015 comes seven weeks before the Busan tariff truce expires on Nov. 10 and with a $14 billion Taiwan arms package still not sent to Congress.
Two Deadlines, One Handshake
Xi Jinping landed in Washington on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, for a state visit that runs through Friday[1][3]. It's his first state visit to the United States since 2015, and the ceremony is the full package: a Rose Garden honor-guard review on Thursday, a summit with President Trump, and a state dinner in the East Room that evening, with several U.S. tech CEOs expected among the guests[1]. China's Foreign Ministry confirmed the dates two days earlier and called the visit one "of historic, milestone significance"[4].
Underneath the pageantry sit two numbers nobody at the dinner will say out loud. One is a tariff rate. The other is a dollar figure attached to weapons for Taiwan. Both are already public, both sides already know them, and neither has been resolved. That's the real agenda.
The Clock Both Men Are Watching
Trump and Xi have now met three times in under a year: Busan in October 2025, Trump's own state visit to Beijing in May 2026, and now this one[1][2]. The October deal set the terms both sides are operating under. The U.S. cut its fentanyl-related tariff on Chinese goods from 20% to 10%, part of a broader drop in the average U.S. tariff on Chinese imports from about 57% to 47%[14][15]. China, in turn, suspended new export controls on rare-earth minerals and agreed to buy 25 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans a year through 2028[14][15].
That whole arrangement expires on November 10, 2026 — seven weeks from now[14][22]. Unless the two governments extend it, the tariff snaps back up and China's rare-earth licensing tightens again. Neither leader wants that snapback to look like his own choice, which is the main reason a deal of some kind is likely to come out of this week, even a partial one[16].
Rare earths matter here in a specific, mechanical way. China doesn't need to ban anything to squeeze U.S. manufacturers — it just needs to slow down. Its export system requires a government license for each shipment of certain rare-earth elements and the magnets made from them. Slow the approvals, and factory lines outside China stall without a single new law being passed[5][15]. Processing capacity elsewhere is years away from matching China's, so there's no quick substitute[5]. That's the lever China is holding over the trade talks, and it's why both CNN and the Washington Times treat rare earths as the real center of gravity, even while framing who has the edge differently[5][12].
The $14 Billion Question Nobody Will Confirm
The other deadline runs through Taiwan. Congress authorized a roughly $14 billion arms package for the island back in January 2026 — F-16 upgrade parts, ground-based air defenses, anti-ship missiles, surveillance systems for the eastern coast[8]. It followed an earlier $11.1 billion notification in December 2025[8][9]. As of Xi's arrival, the January package still hasn't been formally sent to Congress[8][9].
That's the detail worth understanding: under U.S. law, an arms sale isn't real until the State Department formally notifies Congress. Until that notice goes out, an authorized package is just a plan sitting on a shelf — it can wait indefinitely at zero cost to the White House[8][9]. Send the notice, and it becomes a dated, public act that Beijing can point to as an insult. Trump has been blunt about what that gives him: in May, he called Taiwan arms sales a "very good negotiating chip" with China[9].
That's also where the week's sharpest, murkiest dispute sits. Several outlets reported that Beijing warned, through diplomatic channels, it would cancel the summit outright if Washington approved the sale before Xi arrived[8]. The Daily Caller then reported a senior U.S. official knocking that account down, saying no such threat had changed U.S. planning[11]. Both versions rest entirely on unnamed officials. Neither government has put its name to either claim, so the sequence — did Beijing really threaten to walk, and did it actually move Washington — remains unresolved by design.
For Taiwan, the stakes aren't abstract. Its Defense Ministry says the U.S. and Congress have "repeatedly expressed support" for continued sales, and points out that Taiwan's own 2026 defense budget has climbed to about NT$949.5 billion — roughly 3.32% of its economy, with the core budget up 25% from the year before[8]. That's a bigger share of national output than most U.S. treaty allies spend on defense. From Taipei's view, a paused package isn't a symbolic slight — it's a hole in specific defense plans tied to specific hardware[8].
Same Ceremony, Two Very Different Stories
Beijing's public framing leaves out both deadlines entirely. The Foreign Ministry's language is about status and stability — "historic, milestone significance," an "in-depth exchange of views" — with no mention of Taiwan arms or the tariff clock[4]. Chinese state outlet CGTN's coverage does the same: announcement only, no friction, no numbers[20]. From Beijing's position, arms sales to Taiwan aren't a policy dispute to negotiate at all — they're treated as interference in what China considers an internal matter, which is why a sale timed near a state visit reads in Beijing as a deliberate insult rather than routine business[8][10].
The Trump administration's framing runs the opposite direction: pressure works. Before the tariffs, in this account, Washington asked China to change and got nothing; after them, China agreed to the soybean purchases, suspended its rare-earth controls, and moved on fentanyl precursors[14][15]. Administration officials argue that not sending the Taiwan notification is a deliberate use of leverage, not a concession — spend the card and it's gone[9]. They also reject the idea that Chinese threats are steering the calendar at all[11].
A third view, running from CNN's reporting to a Foreign Affairs analysis to congressional China hawks in both parties, argues that American leverage has already eroded — citing China's rare-earth dominance, its narrowing AI gap, and its ability to absorb the 2025 tariff rounds without much damage[5][21]. Hawks in Congress make a related but sharper point: authorizing the Taiwan package in January was meant to take the timing out of any summit's hands, and leaving it unnotified now signals that Beijing can freeze a U.S. commitment just by scheduling a dinner[10]. The Washington Times found a more measured version of the same idea, quoting analysts who describe the current balance as roughly matched — which is why both sides are pulling back from costly moves rather than escalating[12].
One quieter signal undercuts the pageantry on its own. South China Morning Post reports Chinese CEOs are largely expected to skip the trip, a sign of "thin summit expectations" regardless of what either government says publicly[18].
What the Coverage Reveals About Itself
The range of coverage this week is its own story. Fox News's news desk framed the summit as an "AI supremacy battle," organizing the whole relationship as a contest to be won[6]. Its opinion coverage went further, giving Gatestone Institute's Gordon Chang space to claim Xi is preparing troops "for battle" — a claim carrying no documentary sourcing of its own[7]. CNN's framing put a verdict in its own headline: "mostly in China's favor" — real evidence follows, but it's scorekeeping more than agenda-setting, and it leaves out what the U.S. secured at Busan[5]. The Washington Times, despite its conservative lean, was the most restrained of the group, leaning on analysts describing a genuine stalemate[12]. The Associated Press stayed closest to straight sourcing, anchored to Taiwan's Defense Ministry, though even its framing centers Taipei's hope rather than what Washington has actually decided[8].
None of that resolves the two questions actually hanging over the East Room this week: whether the November 10 truce gets extended, and whether that $14 billion notification ever goes to Congress. Both are choices still sitting on the table when the state dinner ends.
Summary
Chinese President Xi Jinping landed in Washington on Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2026, for a three-day state visit[1][3]. He and President Donald Trump are set to meet at the White House on Thursday, Sept. 24, with an honor-guard review in the Rose Garden and a state dinner in the East Room that evening[1]. It is Xi's first state visit to the United States since 2015, and his third face-to-face meeting with Trump in under a year — after Busan in October 2025 and Trump's own state visit to Beijing in May 2026[1][2].
Two deadlines sit under the ceremony. The first is trade. The Busan truce, which cut the U.S. fentanyl-related tariff on Chinese goods from 20% to 10% — part of a broader reduction in the average U.S. tariff on Chinese imports from about 57% to 47% — and paused China's new rare-earth export controls, runs out on Nov. 10, 2026[14][15]. That leaves about seven weeks. The second is Taiwan. Congress authorized a roughly $14 billion U.S. arms package for Taiwan in January 2026, but the administration has not sent the formal notification that starts the sale[8][9]. Trump has publicly called arms sales to Taiwan a 'very good negotiating chip' with China[9].
The sharpest dispute is over that package. Several outlets reported that Beijing warned through diplomatic channels it would cancel the summit if Washington approved the sale before Xi arrived[8]. A senior U.S. official pushed back on that account, saying no such threat had moved U.S. planning[11]. Both claims rest on unnamed officials; neither government has published a statement confirming or denying the threat. Taiwan's Defense Ministry says it expects U.S. arms sales to continue[8].
The deeper disagreement is about who is negotiating from strength. CNN and Foreign Affairs argue American leverage has eroded — China leads in rare earths, has narrowed the AI gap, and absorbed the 2025 tariff rounds[5][21]. The Washington Times quotes analysts who say leverage is now roughly matched, which is why both sides are pulling back from costly moves rather than escalating[12]. The White House position is that tariffs brought Xi to the table at all.
The Event
Xi Jinping and his wife, Peng Liyuan, arrived in the United States on Sept. 23, 2026, for a state visit running through Sept. 25[1][3]. On Sept. 24, Trump is scheduled to receive them at the White House, review an honor guard in the Rose Garden, and hold a summit meeting, followed by a state dinner in the East Room expected to include leaders of major U.S. technology companies[1]. China's Foreign Ministry confirmed the dates on Sept. 21 and said the two leaders would exchange views on relations and on 'world peace and development'[4]. As of the arrival date, the administration had not formally notified Congress of the pending $14 billion Taiwan arms package[8][9].
Undisputed Facts
- Xi Jinping's state visit to the United States runs Sept. 23-25, 2026, as announced by China's State Council and Foreign Ministry on Sept. 21[3][4].
- This is Xi's first state visit to the United States since September 2015[1][2].
- The White House summit is scheduled for Sept. 24 and includes a Rose Garden honor-guard review and an East Room state dinner[1].
- Trump made a state visit to China in May 2026 and invited Xi to Washington for September; the two also met at Busan on Oct. 30, 2025[1][2].
- Under the Busan agreement, the U.S. cut its fentanyl-related tariff on Chinese goods from 20% to 10% (part of a broader reduction in the average U.S. tariff on Chinese imports from about 57% to 47%), and China suspended its October 2025 rare-earth export controls for one year[14][15][22].
- The Busan arrangement — including Section 301 tariff exemptions and China's rare-earth suspension — expires Nov. 10, 2026[14][22].
- China committed at Busan to buy 25 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans a year through 2028 and to cooperate on fentanyl precursor exports[14][15].
- The State Department notified Congress of roughly $11.1 billion in proposed arms sales to Taiwan in December 2025; a separate roughly $14 billion package authorized in January 2026 has not been formally notified[8][9].
- Trump publicly described arms sales to Taiwan as a 'very good negotiating chip' with China after the May 2026 Beijing summit[9].
The Pressure
Strip away the moralizing and blame. What structural realities persist regardless of which narrative wins?
- The Nov. 10 cliff
- Both sides face the same hard date. The Busan package — the fentanyl-tariff cut to 10% (within a broader average-tariff reduction to about 47%), Section 301 exemptions, and China's suspension of rare-earth export controls — all lapse on Nov. 10, 2026[14][22]. Neither leader wants a snapback he did not choose. That shared deadline, more than any summit agenda, is what makes a deal likely in some form[16].
- Rare earths as a licensing switch
- China does not need a tariff to hurt U.S. manufacturers. Its export-control system requires a license for each shipment of certain rare-earth elements and magnets. Slowing approvals stops factory lines without formally banning anything, and it is hard to counter because processing capacity outside China is limited and takes years to build[5][15]. That is the specific mechanism behind every claim that leverage has shifted.
- Notification as the trigger
- A U.S. foreign arms sale becomes real when the State Department formally notifies Congress. Until that notice goes up, an authorized package is a plan, not a sale, and it can sit indefinitely. That is why the $14 billion Taiwan package functions as a bargaining chip: withholding notification costs the administration nothing today, while sending it is a public, dated act Beijing can point to[8][9].
- Symbolism has asymmetric value
- A state visit — honor guard, state dinner, the full protocol — is worth more to Xi at home than it costs Trump to grant. That asymmetry gives Washington a low-cost inducement, and it also explains why Beijing treats a Taiwan arms announcement during the visit as a calculated humiliation rather than routine business[1][4].
Material realityThe physical facts do not move with the framing. China still processes the large majority of the world's rare earths and the magnets made from them, and U.S. and allied substitutes are years from scale[5]. U.S. tariffs still raise the landed price of Chinese goods for American importers; the fentanyl-related component sits at 10% and is scheduled to change on Nov. 10, within an average U.S. tariff on Chinese imports of roughly 47%[14][22]. Taiwan is still buying: about NT$949.5 billion in 2026 defense spending, roughly 3.32% of its economy, with the core defense budget up 25%[8]. The $14 billion package — F-16 upgrade parts, ground-based air defenses, anti-ship missiles, eastern-coast surveillance — is authorized and unnotified, so nothing has shipped[8]. Chinese soybean purchases run to 25 million metric tons a year under a commitment that extends to 2028[14]. And Chinese business leaders are expected to be largely absent from the delegation, which is a measurable signal about expectations regardless of what either government says[18].
Narrative as a weaponThree narratives are competing for this week. The White House wants you to believe that tariffs produced the summit, that the Taiwan package is a card he is playing well, and that any deal is a win extracted under pressure. Beijing wants you to believe the relationship has been normalized between equals — hence 'historic, milestone significance' and total silence on Taiwan arms and the tariff deadline[4][20]. A third camp, running from CNN and Foreign Affairs on one side to congressional China hawks on the other, wants you to believe American leverage has already slipped and that a deal signed now locks in the loss[5][21][10] — the same conclusion reached from opposite political starting points. Underneath all three, note who is anonymous: the reported Chinese threat to cancel over Taiwan arms and the U.S. official's denial both come from unnamed sources, and neither government has put its name to either claim[8][11]. Treat that specific sequence as unresolved.
How Each Side Sees It
Each major actor’s view — how it frames things, its underlying incentive, and how it’s materially affected. Tap a side to read it.
Frames it asThe White House argues that tariffs and export controls are what created the talks in the first place. Before 2025, it says, Washington asked China to change and got nothing. After tariffs, China agreed to buy 25 million metric tons of soybeans a year, suspended its rare-earth controls, and agreed to work on fentanyl precursors[14][15]. On Taiwan, the argument is that a president should not hand over his strongest card for free. Holding the $14 billion package unnotified keeps it usable at the table; notifying it spends it[9]. Administration officials also reject the idea that Beijing dictated the summit's terms, saying reported cancellation threats did not change U.S. planning[11]. The state visit itself, in this view, is leverage: Xi wanted the ceremony, and ceremony is cheap compared with tariff relief.
WhyTrump wants a deliverable before Nov. 10 — soybean and Boeing purchases, and continued rare-earth flow — without appearing to have been pushed into it. A rupture would hit farm-state exporters and aerospace suppliers weeks before the midterm season[16].
Impact on themIf the truce lapses, tariffs snap back and China's rare-earth controls resume, raising input costs for U.S. manufacturers and the Pentagon[5][14]. If he notifies the Taiwan sale, he risks the trade track; if he keeps holding it, he faces criticism from congressional China hawks[10].
Frames it asBeijing's stated frame is stability and equal standing. The Foreign Ministry called reciprocal state visits within six months 'of historic, milestone significance' — language that treats the relationship as one between peers, not a dispute to be adjudicated[4]. On Taiwan, China's position is that it is not a foreign-policy concession at all but a sovereignty question: arms sales to Taipei are, in Beijing's telling, interference in a Chinese internal matter, which is why it treats a sale approved days before a state visit as a deliberate insult rather than routine business[8][10]. On trade, Beijing argues it has honored the Busan terms — the soybean purchases, the export-control suspension — and that the burden is now on Washington to extend the truce rather than add new restrictions[14][15].
WhyXi wants tariff relief locked in past Nov. 10, relief from U.S. AI-chip restrictions, and the symbolism of a full White House state visit as proof that pressure did not isolate China[5][16].
Impact on themChinese exporters face a tariff snapback if talks fail. Domestically, the Rose Garden pageantry is itself an asset for Xi. Notably, Chinese CEOs are expected to largely skip the trip, which SCMP links to thin expectations and unresolved disputes over a bilateral investment body[18].
Frames it asTaipei's case rests on a legal and practical point, not a plea. U.S. law and repeated congressional action commit Washington to support Taiwan's self-defense, and Taiwan's Defense Ministry says the U.S. government and Congress have 'repeatedly expressed support' for that[8]. Its strongest argument is that it is not free-riding: Taiwan's 2026 defense spending reaches about NT$949.5 billion, roughly 3.32% of its economy, with the core defense budget up 25% from the prior year[8]. That is a larger share of national output than most U.S. treaty allies spend. Taipei's worry is precedent — if a weapons package can be paused to smooth a summit, the commitment becomes a variable rather than a floor[9][19].
WhySecure delivery of the $14 billion package and keep arms sales procedural rather than political, so they are not traded away in a future round[8][19].
Impact on themThe paused package includes F-16 upgrade components, ground-based air defenses, anti-ship missiles and surveillance systems along Taiwan's eastern coast — capabilities tied to specific defense plans, so a delay is a capability gap, not just a symbolic slight[8].
Frames it asThis group, which spans both parties, argues that deterrence works only if it is predictable. Congress authorized the $14 billion package in January 2026 precisely so it would not depend on the mood of a summit; leaving it unnotified, they say, tells Beijing that pressure on the calendar can freeze U.S. commitments[10]. Their second argument is about the trade deal itself: the Busan terms bought a one-year pause on China's rare-earth controls, not their removal, so the U.S. paid in tariff reductions for something that expires on schedule[14][22]. A related line, made in Foreign Affairs, is that a deal locking in the current arrangement would cement Beijing's advantage for years[21].
WhyForce the notification before or shortly after the summit and establish that arms sales are not tradable[10].
Impact on themThey control the oversight levers — notification review, appropriations, and hearings — and can make a quiet pause politically expensive.
Frames it asThese are the parties with money on the Nov. 10 date. Farm exporters want the 25-million-ton-a-year soybean commitment to survive any renegotiation[14][16]. Manufacturers and defense suppliers want China's rare-earth export-control suspension extended, because those minerals go into magnets, motors and precision weapons with few substitutes at scale[5]. U.S. technology executives, several of whom are expected at the state dinner, are split: some want AI-chip export rules eased so they can sell into China, while others argue that selling advanced chips speeds up a competitor[1][6][16].
WhyPredictability. A rolling three-to-six-month extension is workable; a snapback is not[16].
Impact on themIf the truce lapses, the 10% tariff rises again and rare-earth licensing tightens, with costs landing on downstream U.S. buyers[14][22].
Like this article?
The Bias Ledger average rating 4.9
The same story, as framed by outlets across the spectrum, ordered least to most biased. The bias score (1 = straight, 10 = heavily spun) is an AI assessment of that framing — click an outlet to see its track record. The tell is the word choice or omission that reveals the angle.
| Outlet | Vantage | Bias | How they frame it | The tell |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Associated Press | U.S. center, wire service | 2 | "Taiwan is watching closely as Xi and Trump meet and hopes US will keep up its arms sales" | Straight sourcing and attributed quotes from Taiwan's Defense Ministry. Mild tell: the story is anchored to Taipei's hope rather than to what the U.S. has actually decided, which foregrounds anxiety over the procedural record. |
| The Washington Times | U.S. right | 3 | "'Managing a stalemate': Long list of thorny topics await at Trump-Xi meeting at White House" | Unusually restrained for its lane; leans on analyst quotes describing matched leverage. The tell is selection — its companion piece, 'China state media previews Xi agenda for summit,' treats Chinese outlets as an agenda-setting bloc rather than quoting Chinese officials directly. |
| Fox News | U.S. right | 4 | "China's Xi to arrive in Washington for high-stakes Trump summit as AI supremacy battle looms large" | Contest vocabulary — 'supremacy battle,' 'high-stakes' — organizes the summit as a zero-sum fight. Trade mechanics like the Nov. 10 expiry get less room than the AI rivalry. |
| South China Morning Post | Hong Kong; owned by Alibaba Group, generally cautious on Beijing red lines but not a state outlet | 4 | "China CEOs to likely miss Xi's US trip amid thin summit expectations" and "US hawks push Trump on multibillion-dollar Taiwan arms deal ahead of Xi summit" | Lowers expectations rather than celebrating the visit — useful signal. The tell is the label 'hawks' for U.S. lawmakers pressing a sale Congress already authorized, which codes a legislative act as a faction's agenda. |
| CNN | U.S. center-left | 5 | "A lot's changed since Xi Jinping's last US state visit. Mostly in China's favor." | The verdict is in the headline. Real evidence follows — rare earths, domestic AI models, reusable rockets — but the framing scores the relationship rather than reporting the agenda, and it omits what the U.S. got at Busan. |
| CGTN | Chinese state media | 6 | "Chinese President Xi Jinping to pay state visit to US from September 23 to 25" | Announcement only. No mention of Taiwan arms, the tariff expiry, or any disagreement. Omission is the entire method: the reader learns a visit is happening and nothing about what is contested[20]. |
| The Daily Caller | U.S. right | 7 | "China's Supposed Trump-Xi Summit Threat Gets Shot Down By Senior US Official" | 'Supposed' and 'shot down' settle a contested, anonymously sourced dispute in one direction. A single unnamed U.S. official is treated as dispositive against multiple reports of the Chinese warning. |
| Fox News (Opinion) | U.S. right | 8 | "Xi prepares China 'for battle' as expert warns of serious danger facing US" | Builds the piece on Gordon Chang of the Gatestone Institute, a long-standing advocate of the view that China's collapse or war is imminent. His orientation is not disclosed as advocacy, and the claim that Xi is 'mulling war' carries no documentary sourcing. |
References
- 2026 state visit by Xi Jinping to the United States — Wikipedia · Crowd-edited encyclopedia; itinerary details sourced to news reports, not a primary source
- Chinese President Xi Jinping will pay state visit to US this week, Beijing confirms — South China Morning Post · Hong Kong daily owned by Alibaba Group; independent newsroom but operates under Hong Kong's legal environment
- Xi to pay state visit to U.S. from Sept. 23 to 25 — The State Council of the People's Republic of China · Chinese government primary source
- Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Guo Jiakun's Regular Press Conference on September 21, 2026 — Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China · Chinese government primary source
- A lot's changed since Xi Jinping's last US state visit. Mostly in China's favor. — CNN · U.S. center-left
- China's Xi to arrive in Washington for high-stakes Trump summit as AI supremacy battle looms large — Fox News · U.S. right
- Xi prepares China 'for battle' as expert warns of serious danger facing US — Fox News · U.S. right; built on commentary from the Gatestone Institute, a conservative advocacy think tank
- Taiwan is watching closely as Xi and Trump meet and hopes US will keep up its arms sales — Associated Press · U.S. center, nonprofit wire cooperative
- Trump waffles on $14 billion arms sale to Taiwan after talking to China's Xi — Axios · U.S. center; access-driven Washington reporting
- US hawks push Trump on multibillion-dollar Taiwan arms deal ahead of Xi summit — South China Morning Post · Hong Kong daily owned by Alibaba Group
- China's Supposed Trump-Xi Summit Threat Gets Shot Down By Senior US Official — The Daily Caller · U.S. right, movement-conservative
- 'Managing a stalemate': Long list of thorny topics await at Trump-Xi meeting at White House — The Washington Times · U.S. right; owned by an entity affiliated with the Unification movement
- China state media previews Xi agenda for summit — The Washington Times · U.S. right
- Busan Summit — Wikipedia · Crowd-edited encyclopedia summarizing the October 2025 agreement terms
- Trump-Xi Meeting: US and China Agree to Tariff, Rare Earth Concessions — China Briefing · Trade-advisory publication of Dezan Shira & Associates; serves foreign businesses operating in China
- CNBC's The China Connection newsletter: Five things to watch for the Trump-Xi summit — CNBC · U.S. business press, investor-oriented
- Ten Issues to Watch at the Trump-Xi Summit in Washington — Council on Foreign Relations · U.S. establishment foreign-policy think tank; corporate and foundation funded
- China CEOs to likely miss Xi's US trip amid thin summit expectations — South China Morning Post · Hong Kong daily owned by Alibaba Group
- Taiwan responds to Donald Trump's hesitation to back arms sales after Xi Jinping talks — The Hill · U.S. center; Capitol Hill trade publication
- Chinese President Xi Jinping to pay state visit to US from September 23 to 25 — CGTN · Chinese state media, run by China Media Group under the Communist Party's Publicity Department
- America Has Lost Its Leverage Over China: How Trump and Xi Could Cement Beijing's Advantage for Years to Come — Foreign Affairs · Journal of the Council on Foreign Relations; signed analysis, not news reporting
- US to lower China tariffs as part of trade war truce — Supply Chain Dive · U.S. industry trade publication for logistics and procurement professionals