Workflow
热点思考 | 美国贸易协议中的“虚虚实实” (申万宏观·赵伟团队)
申万宏源研究·2025-08-12 01:42

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the upcoming expiration of the US-China tariff suspension measures and the potential for easing trade risks following recent "investment for tariff" agreements between the US and other economies like Japan and the EU [2][49]. Group 1: Trade Negotiation Progress - The US has made significant progress in trade negotiations, having reached agreements or suspensions with nine economies, covering 49.7% of its import goods as of August 1 [2][6]. - The effective tariff rate in the US for Q2 was 7.9%, significantly lower than the theoretical rate, which has risen to 18.3% from 2.4% at the beginning of the year [2][9]. - The US has established a three-tiered tariff system based on trade agreements, with low tariffs (10%) for allies, mid-range tariffs (15%-20%) for agreed economies, and high tariffs (20%-50%) for those with stalled negotiations [3][14]. Group 2: Feasibility of Trade Agreements - The EU must increase its annual investment in the US by 2.6 times to meet its commitment of $600 billion, with the majority of funding coming from private enterprises, making execution uncertain [4][51]. - Japan's commitment of $550 billion is primarily in loans, requiring a 4.7-fold increase in annual investment to fulfill its promise [4][21]. - South Korea's commitment of $350 billion represents 53% of its fiscal spending, necessitating a dramatic increase in FDI to the US over three years [4][21]. Group 3: Tariff Risk Mitigation - The US is likely to maintain a long-term and targeted approach to tariffs, with significant revenue generation from tariffs being a primary benefit of trade agreements [5][32]. - As of July 29, 2025, US tariff revenue reached $125.6 billion, 2.3 times higher than the previous year, indicating a shift in focus from currency manipulation to fiscal control [5][32]. - The article suggests that the US may continue to leverage tariff threats as a negotiation tool, with a potential shift in strategy from historical approaches that focused on currency adjustments to a more fiscal-oriented strategy [5][37].