△美联社报道，美最高法院 驳回特朗普的全面关税政策 当地时间2月20日，美国最高法院作出"里程碑"式判决：以6比3的多数意见，裁定特朗普政府依靠"国际紧急经济权力法"（IEEPA）征 收的一揽子全球关税缺乏法律依据，大部分关税自一开始就"无权征收"，因此无效。 这意味着，支撑特朗普第二任期"关税政策"的一根重要支柱被法院抽走，不仅直接牵动数千亿美元贸易与可能高达数百亿美元的关税 退款，也给未来任何总统动用"紧急权力"实施大规模经济政策划下了红线，同时迫使白宫在接下来的操作中，从"快、猛、覆盖面 大"的行政手段，转向"更慢、更程序化、更容易被诉讼牵制"的传统贸易路径。 判决公布后，特朗普迅速宣布将通过其他法律手段推出新的10%全球关税，誓言"不会后退一步"。与此同时，美国舆论围绕总统权 力、国会授权和美国对外经济路线的争论则全面升级。 △《时代》报道，最高法院裁定特朗普的大部分关税政策违法，这对其经济议程的核心造成沉重打击 △《纽约时报》报道，最高法院推翻特朗普全面 关税政策后，白宫在特朗普的新闻发布上调暗了灯光 最高法院的多数法官不认可这一"大招"。首席大法官罗伯茨在判决书中用了非常直白的逻辑： 首先，IEE ...

2月20日晚间，美股三大指数盘中直线拉升。 【导读】关税违法，市场大涨 兄弟姐妹们啊，大年初五，美国最高法院送来史诗级利好！ 美国最高法院作出裁决：特朗普对等关税和芬太尼关税违法！大法官们以6比3裁定，认为特朗普政府依 据1977年的《国际紧急经济权力法》（IEEPA），对全球进入美国的商品征收激进关税的做法，不被该 法律所允许。 美元指数直线跳水。 黄金、白银剧烈波动，截至发稿，白银暴涨近5%，黄金涨超1%。分析师James Athey指出，市场似乎不 太确定该如何应对美国最高法院的裁决。 中国资产方面，中概股指数低开高走转涨。富时中国A50指数直线拉升涨近1%，人民币短线拉升！ 纳斯达克中国金龙指数(.HXC) Q C < 交易中 02-20 10:53:20 美东时间 7558.12 :::= L1 : +4.14 +0.05% 7424.31 રો 高 7558.84 O 股 最 成交量 开 7421.07 1.82% 收 7553.98 lee 振 卧库 幅 最 家 29 漫 48 日 家 1 跌 家 三 美股三大指数低开高走,明星科技股涨跌不一 × 日 K 更多▼ 分时 五日 一年 團 K 0 7 ...

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Supreme Court is set to announce decisions on key tariff policies from the Trump administration, which could significantly impact the legal standing of these tariffs and the associated costs for importers [1][2]. Group 1: Supreme Court Decisions - The Supreme Court will release opinions on February 20, 24, and 25, with the potential to overturn tariffs that currently cost importers over $16 billion monthly [1]. - The case under review involves the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), with estimates suggesting total tariffs could exceed $170 billion by February 20 [1]. - Justices have expressed skepticism regarding the president's unilateral authority to impose tariffs, indicating a possible challenge to Trump's actions [1][6]. Group 2: Congressional Challenges - The House of Representatives has passed legislation to terminate certain tariffs on Canadian imports, marking a significant political challenge to Trump's tariff policies [2]. - Six Republican representatives joined Democrats in supporting the bill, highlighting a weakening grip of Trump on the party as midterm elections approach [2]. - Senate Republican leaders expect a similar vote in the Senate, although Trump is likely to veto any legislation aimed at repealing his tariffs [2]. Group 3: Political Implications - Trump has warned Republican lawmakers that opposing his tariff policies could lead to severe political consequences in upcoming elections [3]. - The recent House vote represents a setback for House Speaker Mike Johnson, a key ally of Trump, as bipartisan support for the bill indicates growing discontent with Trump's economic agenda [3]. - The Democratic Party has capitalized on the situation, criticizing Republican lawmakers for supporting policies that increase living costs for voters [2][3]. Group 4: Economic Impact - The tariffs in question are estimated to impose over $16 billion in monthly costs on importers, which could have significant repercussions for the overall economy [1][6]. - The Supreme Court's decision on these tariffs will serve as a critical statement on presidential power and could influence future trade policies [6].

在被问及如果美国最高法院否决其依据《国际紧急经济权力法》（IEEPA）实施的广泛关税，他将如何 推进与格陵兰相关的关税措施时，美国总统特朗普表示，"看看许可证这个词"。 特朗普表示，他在达沃斯期间安排了与格陵兰"相关人士"的会面； 特朗普表示，他在达沃斯期间安排了与格陵兰"相关人士"的会面； 特朗普表示，他不认为有关格陵兰的威胁将危及欧盟对美国的投资。 特朗普表示，他不认为有关格陵兰的威胁将危及欧盟对美国的投资。 责任编辑：丁文武 在被问及如果美国最高法院否决其依据《国际紧急经济权力法》（IEEPA）实施的广泛关税，他将如何 推进与格陵兰相关的关税措施时，美国总统特朗普表示，"看看许可证这个词"。 特朗普在白宫新闻发布会上发表讲话， 特朗普在白宫新闻发布会上发表讲话， 特朗普说，如果最高法院限制其关税政策，他将需要考虑替代手段； 特朗普说，如果最高法院限制其关税政策，他将需要考虑替代手段； 责任编辑：丁文武 ...

美国总统唐特朗普周五表示，他可能会对那些"不配合格陵兰事务"的国家征收新的关税。 "出于国家安全考虑，我们需要格陵兰。所以我可能会这么做，"特朗普在白宫一场与医疗保健相关的活 动上说道。 这番言论表明，近几个月来特朗普试图让美国获得格陵兰岛的举动日益激进，如今他再次动用自己最钟 爱的外交施压工具之一——关税，以向外国施加影响力。 对于媒体就特朗普上述言论寻求进一步说明的请求，白宫未立即作出回应。 此前，特朗普政府曾表示正在考虑多种方案，包括动用美军，以接管这个丹麦属地。 尽管美国已在格陵兰设有军事基地，但特朗普坚称，由于中国和俄罗斯带来的国家安全威胁，美国必须 拥有格陵兰岛。 白宫还曾表示，美国正考虑提出得到这座北极岛屿的报价。然而，格陵兰和丹麦方面已多次明确表示， 该领土不出售，也无意并入美国。 就在提出可能以关税手段逼迫他国支持其格陵兰计划之前，特朗普曾描述过类似策略：通过威胁提高关 税，迫使外国提高药品价格。 特朗普一直致力于降低美国国内药价，主张强制要求美国药价与海外更低的价格水平挂钩。 在周五的白宫活动中，特朗普称，他曾威胁多个国家领导人：要么在"最惠国"协议框架下提高药品价 格，要么将面临对其所有 ...

今日周四(1月8日)亚盘时段，COMEX白银目前交投于77.76一线下方，今日开盘于77.96美元/盎司，截 至发稿，comex白银暂报77.74美元/盎司，下跌0.31%，最高触及78.90美元/盎司，最低下探77.30美元/盎 司，目前来看，comex白银盘内短线偏向看跌走势。 打开APP，查看更多高清行情>> 【要闻速递】 在最近的一份报告中，摩根士丹利分析师表示，尽管最高法院可能会完全废除或支持总统使用《国际紧 急经济权力法》（IEEPA），但预计会做出更细致的裁决。分析师指出："我们探讨了这两种情况之间 的灰色地带，并更新了我们对经济和市场结果的预期。" 最有可能的情况是最高法院在不完全废除《国际紧急经济权力法》（IEEPA）的情况下，缩小其适用范 围。据该报告称，法院拥有"广泛的裁量权"，可以作出例如限制未来关税适用或缩小现有关税范围的裁 决，而无需下令完全取消关税。 【最新comex白银行情解析】 comex白银价格走势使得日线图上形成看跌双顶反转形态的可能性上升。多头的下一个上行目标是收盘 价突破82.67美元/盎司的纪录高点这一强劲技术阻力位；空头的下一个下行目标是收盘价跌破上周低点 69. ...

Core Points - President Trump initially imposed tariffs on food imports to enhance U.S. self-sufficiency but has now reversed some of these tariffs on agricultural products that cannot be produced domestically at scale, such as coffee, bananas, and orange juice [1][4] - The new tariff exemptions took effect retroactively on November 13, 2025, with Trump indicating that he does not foresee further policy rollbacks in the future [1][8] Tariffs and Economic Impact - Tariffs are taxes on imports aimed at protecting domestic industries and generating revenue, theoretically leading to reduced imports and increased domestic consumption [2] - Despite the intention behind tariffs, they cannot effectively stimulate production of items like coffee and bananas that are not feasible to grow in the U.S. [4][6] - Coffee prices surged over 40% year-over-year due to the tariffs, while banana prices increased nearly 9% [7] Legal Challenges - The tariffs have faced legal challenges, with a federal appeals court ruling that Trump overstepped his authority by imposing tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [9][11] - The Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case, with indications that justices may be skeptical of Trump's authority to impose such tariffs [12] Tariff Rebate Checks - Trump proposed a $2,000 per person tariff "dividend" to alleviate cost of living concerns, although this would require Congressional approval [13][14] - Despite claims of reduced prices, average grocery prices in the U.S. were reported to be 2.7% higher in September compared to the previous year [14]

Core Points - President Trump warned that a Supreme Court ruling against his use of emergency powers to impose tariffs could lead to an economic and national security disaster [1][3] - The Supreme Court justices expressed skepticism regarding Trump's authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs, as the act does not explicitly mention tariffs [3] - Trump claimed that the potential refunds due to a negative ruling could exceed $3 trillion, including tariff revenues and investments, which he described as a catastrophic impact on national security [4] Group 1 - Trump emphasized that the estimated refund amounts are too low and that the actual figure could exceed $3 trillion, which would have devastating effects on the economy and national security [4] - He stated that if the Supreme Court rules against him, it would create an insurmountable national security event that could jeopardize the future of the United States [4] - Trump's administration plans to use tariff revenues to provide $2,000 payments to middle- and low-income Americans and to reduce national debt [4] Group 2 - Trump's chief economic advisor noted that the government initially intended to use tariff revenues solely for deficit reduction, but now sees an opportunity to distribute bonuses due to increased tax revenues [4]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing challenge in the U.S. Supreme Court regarding President Trump's authority to impose broad tariffs on trade partners under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [3][4]. Group 1: Supreme Court Proceedings - The Supreme Court held a three-hour oral argument regarding Trump's tariff authority, with most justices expressing skepticism about the government's legal basis [4]. - The current Supreme Court consists of six conservative justices and three liberal justices, with the liberal justices openly opposing Trump's use of emergency tariff powers [7]. - Chief Justice Roberts raised concerns about the absence of the term "tariff" in the IEEPA and emphasized that taxation is traditionally a congressional power [7]. Group 2: Economic Impact of Tariffs - According to Goldman Sachs, American consumers are expected to bear over 55% of the tariff costs, with businesses absorbing 22% and foreign exporters taking on 18% [7]. - The average effective tariff rate faced by U.S. consumers is estimated at 17.9%, the highest since 1934, leading to a projected 1.3% increase in price levels and an average loss of $1,800 per household [8]. - The tariffs are anticipated to raise the unemployment rate by 0.3 percentage points by the end of 2025 and by 0.7 percentage points by the end of 2026 [8]. Group 3: Potential Outcomes and Alternatives - If the Supreme Court rules against the emergency tariffs, companies involved in the lawsuit may receive refunds, while others might face complex administrative processes for reimbursement [9]. - The article mentions that the government has a "Plan B" in case of an unfavorable ruling, which could involve other legal provisions, though they may be less effective than IEEPA [10]. - The market has shown resilience despite the tariffs, indicating that if the court overturns them, it could be seen as a victory for institutional checks and balances, potentially strengthening long-term market confidence [10].

Core Viewpoint - The authority of President Trump to impose broad tariffs on trade partners under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) is being challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court, raising significant legal and economic implications for U.S. trade policy [1][2]. Group 1: Supreme Court Proceedings - The Supreme Court held a three-hour oral argument regarding Trump's tariff authority, with most justices expressing skepticism about the government's legal basis for the tariffs [2][3]. - The court consists of six conservative justices and three liberal justices, with the liberal justices openly opposing Trump's emergency tariff powers [3]. - Chief Justice Roberts questioned the absence of the term "tariff" in the IEEPA and emphasized that taxation is traditionally a congressional power, suggesting a potential limitation on presidential authority [3]. Group 2: Economic Impact of Tariffs - U.S. consumers are expected to bear over 55% of the tariff costs, with American businesses absorbing 22% and foreign exporters taking on 18% [3]. - The average effective tariff rate faced by U.S. consumers is estimated at 17.9%, the highest since 1934, leading to a projected 1.3% increase in price levels and an average household loss of $1,800 [4]. - By the end of 2025, these tariffs could increase the unemployment rate by 0.3 percentage points, rising to 0.7 percentage points by the end of 2026 [4]. Group 3: Potential Outcomes and Alternatives - If the Supreme Court rules against the emergency tariffs, companies involved in the lawsuit may receive refunds, while others could face complex administrative processes for reimbursement [5]. - The court may not entirely negate the president's emergency powers but could impose stricter limitations on the scope of tariffs that can be enacted unilaterally [6]. - Trump has mentioned a "second plan," indicating that alternative legal avenues exist for imposing tariffs, although these may be less effective than the IEEPA [5][6].