特朗普赚大了，关税收入超3000亿美元？美联储降息格局再生变数！

Core Points - The U.S. Treasury Secretary's claim of $300 billion in tariff revenue is misleading, as actual revenue has only reached $100 billion by July, requiring an unrealistic daily collection of $13 billion over the next five months [2][7] - The "see-saw effect" of tariffs leads to reduced imports or increased prices, significantly impacting revenue from tariffs, as seen with U.S. soybean exports to China plummeting from 22 million tons to 3 million tons [4][6] - The "Laffer Curve" indicates that tax revenues can decrease if rates exceed a certain threshold, which the Trump administration underestimated, expecting $600 billion from tariffs but potentially receiving only $280 billion [6][19] Tariff Revenue Challenges - The projected $300 billion in tariff revenue is insufficient to cover the interest on the national debt, which exceeds $35 trillion, with interest payments alone expected to exceed $500 billion in the first half of 2025 [7][19] - Tariff revenues are eroding other tax sources, particularly affecting small businesses, leading to job losses and a potential decrease in personal and corporate tax revenues [9][19] Economic Impact - Tariffs are damaging the U.S.'s international credibility, with agricultural states facing political pressure and requiring government subsidies to offset losses from tariffs [11][19] - The Federal Reserve faces a dilemma between inflation pressures and recession risks, with rising service prices linked to tariffs and agricultural states showing signs of economic decline [12][14] Future Implications - The long-term effects of tariff policies are creating a "lose-lose" situation for the U.S., with rising unemployment in agricultural states and a wave of small business closures [19][21] - China's response includes diversifying supply chains and increasing domestic production, which may lead to a more resilient trade system, while U.S. companies are relocating production to Mexico and Southeast Asia [21][23] Conclusion - The tariff policy is likened to a fleeting spectacle, promising $300 billion in revenue but ultimately leading to significant economic damage, including the decline of agricultural states and small businesses [24][25]