宏观｜渠道生态视角下的关税影响及分担情况评估

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the impact of different import models on the pricing and competitiveness of Chinese goods in the U.S. market, emphasizing that the channel ecosystem's differences influence how tariffs affect final prices and product competitiveness [1][2]. Group 1: Import Models - The typical import models in the U.S. include retail purchasing, brand purchasing, and cross-border e-commerce, each with varying degrees of bargaining power that affect how tariffs impact final product prices and competitiveness of Chinese goods [2][3]. - In traditional trade models, the average price of U.S. goods is approximately 2.58 times that of Chinese goods, with over half of the costs occurring domestically in the U.S., which are not subject to tariffs [2][3]. Group 2: Retail Purchasing Model - In the retail purchasing model, major retailers like Walmart and Costco operate under a low-price strategy, resulting in limited profit margins and pressure on suppliers to either lower prices or shift supply chains to lower-cost regions [3]. - The logistics sector in the U.S. is characterized by oligopolistic competition, which reduces the likelihood of logistics companies absorbing tariffs, thereby increasing pressure on suppliers [3]. Group 3: Brand Purchasing Model - In brand purchasing, strong brands like Apple can pass on tariffs primarily to their manufacturers and distributors, while in competitive markets like Nike's, the burden of tariffs is more evenly distributed among brands, manufacturers, and distributors [3]. Group 4: Cross-Border E-Commerce Model - In the cross-border e-commerce model, B2C operators may reduce certain costs to mitigate the impact of tariffs on final prices, while capable operators may shift to D2C models to enhance marketing efficiency and brand strength [4][5]. - The cross-border e-commerce model is characterized by high gross margins and high costs, with procurement costs accounting for 28.4% of final prices, logistics costs for 17.7%, and advertising costs for 19.1% [5].