特朗普5年心血白费！对印度的施压正在失效。印度外交部一句话透露了关键信号，访华成最后赌注

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the large-scale global tariff policy implemented by the Trump administration under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act lacks clear legal authorization, marking it as illegal [1][3]. Group 1: Legal and Financial Implications - The ruling effectively nullifies the expected $1.4 trillion in federal revenue from tariffs that were anticipated from 2026 to 2034 [3]. - The Trump administration had collected over $175 billion in tariffs based on the now-invalidated legal framework, which may require refunds to importers [3]. - The tariffs affected a wide range of goods, including a 10% tariff on all imports from China and varying rates on goods from Mexico and Canada [3]. Group 2: Immediate Responses and New Measures - Following the ruling, Trump announced a new 10% global import tariff, which he later increased to 15%, effective immediately [4][6]. - The new tariff is based on a rarely used provision of the Trade Act of 1974, allowing temporary tariffs for a maximum of 150 days unless extended by Congress [6]. Group 3: International Reactions and Negotiations - The ruling has led to a shift in diplomatic dynamics, particularly with India, which had previously agreed to reduce tariffs in exchange for halting oil purchases from Russia [10][11]. - India's comprehensive tariff on U.S. goods was significantly reduced from 50% to 18%, although India remains cautious about its oil purchasing strategy [10][11]. - The upcoming visit of Trump to China is seen as a critical moment for negotiations, with expectations for discussions on trade agreements and tariffs [11][12][16]. Group 4: Broader Trade Policy Context - The Supreme Court's decision is viewed as a significant setback for Trump's trade policy, which had relied on emergency powers to impose tariffs without congressional approval [16][17]. - Analysts suggest that the ruling may enhance China's negotiating position, as Trump may have lost leverage in discussions regarding agricultural and energy product purchases [14][16].