中新网1月18日电综合路透社、英国《卫报》、美国消费者新闻与商业频道(CNBC)等外媒当地时间17日 报道，美国总统特朗普表示，将从2月1日起对丹麦、挪威、瑞典、法国、德国、英国、荷兰和芬兰出口 至美国的所有商品加征10%关税。 特朗普补充道，加征关税的税率将从6月1日起提高至25%，直至就"完全、彻底购买格陵兰岛"达成协 议。 针对特朗普的这一关税威胁，随后多国纷纷发表声明回应。 丹麦：美国关税政策"令人意外" 据报道，丹麦外交大臣拉斯穆森表示，美国总统特朗普宣布的关税政策"令人意外"。他提到，丹麦正与 欧盟保持密切对话。 拉斯穆森称，"特朗普的声明令人意外。其所指的在格陵兰岛增加军事存在的目的，正是为了加强北极 地区的安全。"他还说，"我们正就此事与欧盟委员会和其他合作伙伴保持密切联系。" 丹麦副首相兼国防大臣波尔森则表示，"特朗普对丹麦、格陵兰岛以及我们北约盟国的威胁是完全不可 接受的。" 他还对多方支持丹麦的声明表示感谢。他强调，"国际法和国家领土主权对国际和平与安全至关重要。 我们必须从欧洲层面捍卫这一点。" 挪威："盟友之间不应存在威胁" 挪威首相斯特勒发表声明称，"盟友之间不应存在威胁。" 他表 ...

转自：新华社 新华财经纽约1月17日电（记者刘亚南）美国总统特朗普17日在社交媒体上发文，宣布美国将从2月1日起对丹麦、挪威、瑞典、法国、德国、英国、荷兰 和芬兰的输美商品加征10%关税。 截至发稿时，白宫尚未就特朗普宣布对上述8国加征关税发布正式声明或文件。 美国全国广播公司新闻台14日报道，据一些专家和原美国政府官员估计，美国购买格陵兰岛的支出可能达到7000亿美元。 格陵兰岛是世界第一大岛，也是丹麦自治领地，有高度自治权，国防和外交事务由丹麦政府掌管。美国目前在格陵兰岛设有一处军事基地。特朗普2025年 上任以来多次扬言要得到格陵兰岛，并声称不排除动用武力的可能性。对此，丹麦等欧洲国家强烈反对。美国和丹麦高级官员14日在白宫就此举行会晤， 但双方仍然存在"根本性分歧"。 自2025年以来，特朗普政府频繁以国家安全为由动用关税工具，受到国内外广泛反对和批评。 编辑：王媛媛 特朗普说，加征关税的税率将从6月1日起提高至25%，直到相关方就美国"全面、彻底购买格陵兰岛"达成协议。他还表示，美国对即刻与上述欧洲8国进 行谈判持开放态度。 特朗普称，上述8国人员前往格陵兰岛，"目的不明"。他警告称，这些国家"正在 ...

在对欧政策方面，特朗普宣布自2026年2月1日起，对丹麦、挪威、瑞典、法国、德国、英国、荷兰、芬 兰输往美国的所有商品征收10%关税，2026年6月1日起税率将上调至25%，直至美国与相关方达成全面 收购格陵兰岛的协议。 欧盟国家大使将于周日会面，讨论特朗普的关税威胁。 一、国际新闻 据《华盛顿邮报》消息，美国总统特朗普因顾虑成本问题，放弃对伊朗发动打击。 此前，特朗普曾在社交媒体上称"是时候寻找伊朗新的领导层了"。 当前暂无国内财经相关快讯。 声明：市场有风险，投资需谨慎。本文为AI大模型基于第三方数据库自动发布，任何在本文出现的信 息（包括但不限于个股、评论、预测、图表、指标、理论、任何形式的表述等）均只作为参考，不构成 个人投资建议。受限于第三方数据库质量等问题，我们无法对数据的真实性及完整性进行分辨或核验， 因此本文内容可能出现不准确、不完整、误导性的内容或信息，具体以公司公告为准。如有疑问，请联 系biz@staff.sina.com.cn。 责任编辑：喜娜AI 一、国际新闻 据《华盛顿邮报》消息，美国总统特朗普因顾虑成本问题，放弃对伊朗发动打击。 此前，特朗普曾在社交媒体上称"是时候寻找伊朗新的领 ...

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing debate over tariffs in the U.S. has intensified following President Trump's urgent statement, which warns of dire consequences if the Supreme Court rules against his administration's tariff policies [1][5]. Group 1: Tariff Policy Overview - Since 2025, the Trump administration has utilized the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose "minimum baseline tariffs" on major trading partners, including China, bypassing Congress [3][5]. - The legality of these tariffs has been challenged by 12 states and several companies, leading to a ruling by the Federal Circuit Court that deemed the policies unlawful, with the case now escalated to the Supreme Court [5][7]. Group 2: Economic Implications - Trump has indicated that an unfavorable Supreme Court ruling could result in tariff refunds amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars and exacerbate corporate investment pressures, potentially costing the U.S. economy trillions [7][10]. - The U.S. economy remains heavily reliant on global trade, with the trade volume between the U.S. and China reaching $688.3 billion in 2024, highlighting the importance of this relationship for economic growth [9][10]. Group 3: U.S.-China Trade Relations - The deep integration of U.S. and Chinese economies means that any adjustments in trade policies will have widespread implications, affecting employment and investment in the U.S. [17][18]. - Recent discussions between the U.S. and China have led to a gradual reduction in tariff pressures, providing a pathway for improved business conditions and demonstrating the feasibility of cooperative solutions [17][18]. Group 4: Future Considerations - The U.S. government is urged to consider a more pragmatic approach to its tariff policies, balancing domestic and international economic interests to avoid exacerbating financial pressures [10][18]. - The ongoing judicial proceedings and evolving U.S.-China trade relations will continue to shape the future of U.S. trade policy, with significant implications for both domestic and global economic stability [18].

Group 1 - China's holdings of U.S. Treasury bonds have decreased to $688.7 billion in 2025, the lowest level since 2008, indicating a strategic adjustment over several years, having dropped nearly half from a peak of $1.32 trillion in 2013 [1][3] - The U.S. national debt has surpassed $38 trillion, equating to approximately $110,000 per American, with annual interest payments reaching $1.2 trillion, which is higher than military spending [3] - The average tariff rate has risen to 18.3%, the highest since 1934, as a result of Trump's trade policies, but only a few hundred billion dollars in additional revenue was generated in 2025, which is negligible compared to the national debt [3] Group 2 - The tariff policies have led to increased costs for American households, with each family spending an additional $2,400 in 2025 due to tariffs, while inflation remains high [5] - A significant portion of U.S. retailers and manufacturers reported that tariffs have severely impacted their businesses, with many absorbing the costs to maintain customer relationships, resulting in thin profit margins [5] - The job market has shown signs of distress, with new job creation in 2025 reaching a ten-year low (excluding the pandemic period), and the unemployment rate rising to 4.6% [5][7] Group 3 - The government experienced a record-long shutdown of 43 days, leading to unpaid federal employees and a paralyzed public service, which negatively affected the fourth-quarter economy [7] - The political polarization has hindered the passage of basic budgetary measures, undermining the effectiveness of Trump's tariff policies [7] - Tariffs have contributed to rising prices, suppressing consumer spending and consequently dragging down federal tax revenues, creating a dilemma for the Federal Reserve regarding interest rate policies [8] Group 4 - The credibility of the U.S. dollar has been questioned globally, with gold prices rising by 18% within the year and many central banks increasing their gold reserves [10] - The share of the Chinese yuan in cross-border payments has surged, with 48% of Saudi oil transactions with China settled in yuan, indicating a shift in global currency dynamics [10] - The U.S. attempts to stabilize its debt through "stablecoins" are insufficient, as the expansion of U.S. debt is outpacing the capacity of stablecoins to absorb it, leading to a growing debt crisis [10]

Group 1 - The current political climate in the U.S. is marked by deep systemic crisis, as indicated by President Trump's alarming statements about the potential collapse of the nation [1] - The Supreme Court is reviewing a significant case regarding the legality of tariffs, which could have a more substantial impact than a localized war, potentially affecting the financial backbone of the U.S. [2] - Trump's reliance on tariffs as a tool for economic strategy has backfired, with the courts ruling that his unilateral tariff actions are unconstitutional, leading to a critical situation for U.S. finances [4] Group 2 - If the Supreme Court upholds the previous ruling, the U.S. may face catastrophic consequences, including the need to refund hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs and potential claims from global companies, which could total trillions [6] - The economic control measures implemented under the guise of national security have ironically created severe risks to the nation, undermining Trump's foreign policy strategies [7] - The U.S. is experiencing increasing isolation as former allies shift towards cooperation with China, highlighting the fragility of Western unity in the face of shifting interests [8] Group 3 - The U.S. economy's reliance on China is underscored by the significant bilateral trade volume, which reached $688.3 billion in 2024, indicating the critical role China plays in U.S. supply chains [10] - American multinational companies depend heavily on the Chinese market for profits, which is essential for their global operations, suggesting that any reduction in trade barriers could alleviate corporate burdens [12] - The U.S. Treasury's proposed fiscal alternatives will be ineffective without cooperation from China, emphasizing the interdependence of the two economies [13] Group 4 - Recent communications from Trump's team suggest a potential softening of the U.S. stance towards China, indicating a shift from pressure tactics to pragmatic engagement aimed at stabilizing supply chains and economic order [15] - The situation serves as a lesson for those clinging to the notion of unilateral dominance, as the U.S. faces the reality of its diminished capacity to exert power without considering the economic interdependencies with China [17] - The economic relationship between the U.S. and China is characterized by mutual support and interdependence, challenging the narrative of one-sided dominance and highlighting the need for a balanced approach to avoid future crises [18]

说到现实，就不得不提那份硬生生落地的政策——白宫宣布自15日起对部分进口半导体、半导体制造设备及衍生品加征25%从价关税，这一刀劈下去，直接 切到的是高端制造的神经，这不是简单的税率变动，这是把全球供应链的地形图又翻了一页，谁是受益者，谁是受损者，非常值得深思。 半导体不是普通商品，它既是"工业之粮"，又是战略资本，给它加税，短期看是对本土产业的保护伞，长期看却可能自缚手脚，因为芯片生产链条漫长且高 度国际化，设备、材料、设计、封测、人才，每一环都可能跨境协作，单方面提高关税，能否真正把产业链拉回本土，还是把制造成本和不确定性一并推给 下游企业，这个账要算清楚。 历史上，贸易保护常以产业保全为名，却常以成本上升为实，这不是危言耸听，而是有前车之鉴，关税会不会在短期内刺激国内相关行业投资，答案或许是 肯定的，但那投资的投向和效率，能否抵消因为关税带来的价格上涨与报复性政策，未必，且别忘了——半导体高度依赖资本设备和专业人才，这些不是关 税能马上创造的东西。 而"褐皮书"则给出另一面资料美联储十几天发布的这份调研显示，多数联储区经济以轻微至温和速度扩张，消费有节日支撑，招聘活动整体稳定，价格总体 温和上涨，且关税 ...

新华财经纽约1月16日电 由于市场担忧美联储新任主席带来的货币政策走向影响和围绕格陵兰岛可能出 现的贸易紧张，纽约股市三大股指16日高开低走，收盘全面下跌。 截至当天收盘，道琼斯工业平均指数比前一交易日下跌83.11点，收于49359.33点，跌幅为0.17%；标准 普尔500种股票指数下跌4.46点，收于6940.01点，跌幅为0.06%；纳斯达克综合指数下跌14.634点，收于 23515.388点，跌幅为0.06%。 美国总统特朗普16日表示，他可能会对那些不支持美国获得格陵兰岛计划的国家加征关税。 特朗普还表示，自己实际上想让白宫国家经济委员会（National Economic Council）主任凯文·哈西特 （Kevin Hassett）留在现有岗位上。市场分析人士认为，这一消息让美联储前理事凯文·沃什（Kevin Warsh）成为下任美联储主席的最主要竞争者，沃什的鸽派程度将低于哈西特。 美联储负责监管的副主席米歇尔·鲍曼（Michelle Bowman）当日则表示，美联储应该基于"有根据"的预 测，而非很多同僚支持的单纯依赖数据，进而采取前瞻性的货币政策。 鲍曼说，除非劳动力市场条件出现清晰 ...

Core Viewpoint - Trump's assertion that China has become one of the largest taxpayers to the U.S. due to tariffs is misleading, as it refers to tariff revenues collected from U.S. importers rather than direct payments from China [3][5][7] Group 1: Tariff Policy Implications - The tariffs imposed by the U.S. increase the cost of imported goods, which are ultimately passed on to American consumers, leading to higher prices [5][9] - Trump's narrative of a "victory" through tariffs is politically motivated, aiming to justify his economic policies amidst rising inflation and consumer fatigue in the U.S. [7][11] - The imposition of tariffs has resulted in increased operational risks for U.S. companies, with many raising prices or delaying investments due to higher costs [11][16] Group 2: Economic Impact on Consumers - Rising costs due to tariffs have led to a decline in consumer confidence, with many households reducing discretionary spending and delaying large purchases [9][16] - Research indicates that Trump's tariff policy could impose an additional cost of approximately $172 per American household, further diminishing purchasing power and economic confidence [16][18] Group 3: China's Response and Market Adaptation - Despite the pressures from U.S. tariffs, China has successfully diversified its trade markets, reducing reliance on the U.S. and maintaining a strong trade surplus [12][14] - China's focus on high-tech manufacturing and renewable energy sectors has provided new growth opportunities, mitigating the impact of U.S. tariffs [12][14] - The Chinese government has decided to continue imposing anti-dumping duties on U.S. and South Korean solar-grade polysilicon, reflecting a strategic legal response to trade disputes [18][21]

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 ...