美国国会预算办公室（CBO）发布关于特朗普关税影响的报告。 ...

Core Points - A federal appeals court has temporarily allowed several tariffs imposed by Trump on international trade partners to remain in effect [1] - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stated that the decisions and permanent injunctions made by the International Trade Court will be temporarily suspended until further notice [1] - The lower court's ruling will be delayed at least until June 9, when both parties will submit legal arguments regarding the suspension of the case [1] Summary by Sections - **Court Ruling**: The appeals court's decision indicates a pause on the lower court's ruling that questioned Trump's authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [1] - **Next Steps**: The appeals court will weigh the issues in the case and consider whether to extend the suspension of the lower court's decisions [1] - **Legal Context**: The International Trade Court had previously ruled that Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not grant him unlimited tariff authority [1]

美国上诉法庭临时叫停针对总统特朗普关税的法院判决。联邦巡回法庭宣称，其需要时间来研究（移交 给他们的）诸多材料。 标普500指数目前涨0.17%，道指涨0.11%，纳指涨0.15%。 ...

如果关税未能持续征收，将削弱特朗普在国内外宣扬其经济成就和贸易强硬立场的说服 力，对其政治遗产和未来执政能力构成实质性挑战。 白宫对CIT的裁决将上诉至华盛顿特区的美国联邦巡回法院，最终可能上诉至美国最高法院。在上诉期 间，白宫可能会寻求紧急中止令，暂缓执行裁决，继续征收关税。 这次裁决给予行政部门最多10天时间完成停止征税的行政程序。如果特朗普政府在此期间成功获得了 紧急中止令，那么关税将继续征收，直到上诉法院或最高法院作出进一步裁决。 3、即使上诉最终失败，特朗普政府仍然可能寻求援引其他法律授权来复刻"对等关税"的效果。 文：国金宏观宋雪涛 5月28日，美国国际贸易法院（CIT）做出了一项重要裁决：认定"特朗普宣布的全球关税行政命令， 以及随后对报复国家征收额外关税的命令"均超出了总统在《国际紧急经济权力法》（IEEPA）下的权 限。此外，法院还裁定，以打击毒品贩运为由对墨西哥和加拿大征收关税的行政命令也属非法，原因是 这些关税未能有效解决毒品 贩运问题。 1、这次裁决暂停了特朗普绝大多数关税——"对等关税"和针对中国、加拿大和墨西哥征收的与芬太尼 相关的关税。 232条款和301条款加征的关税则不受影响 ...

在巴黎国际汽车展上展出的宝马新型EV（2024年10月，巴黎） 欧洲车企正在中国市场丧失份额，还面临美国特朗普关税，受到双重打击。无法采取根本性措施的欧洲 车企转而主攻即使加征关税、销售影响仍较小的高档大型车，采取弥补裂缝的策略。梅赛德斯将在美国 新启动SUV的生产…… 欧洲汽车巨头正面临美国关税政策和中国销售低迷的双重打击。德国的大众（VW）和梅赛德斯-奔驰集 团将通过转向高档大型车来应对难关。欧洲车企正在一直重视的中国市场丧失份额，处于无法采取根本 性措施的局面。 "2024年美国销量增长6%以上，这证明了我们的正确性。虽然存在关税政策课题，但美国蕴藏着巨大的 可能性"。在大众5月16日举行的股东大会上，CEO奥利弗·布鲁姆（Oliver Blume）表示将继续专注于美 国业务。 作为具体措施列举的是恢复1960～70年代在美国广受欢迎的"Scout"品牌。2021年获得商标权的大众将 在美国南卡罗来纳州新建工厂，在2027年之前销售SUV和纯电动皮卡2个车型。 欧洲斯特兰蒂斯（Stellantis）、梅赛德斯、美国福特汽车等公司撤回了2025财年（截至2025年12月）的 业绩预期，日产汽车、马自达等日 ...

Group 1 - The G7 finance ministers committed to increasing sanctions on Russia if no progress is made towards peace with Ukraine, demonstrating support for Kyiv [1][2] - The G7 ministers pledged to continue freezing certain Russian assets and support private sector investment in Ukraine [1] - There is a recognition of heightened uncertainty affecting global economic and financial stability, with a commitment to monitor and address these issues [2] Group 2 - The G7 ministers' statement reflects a compromise, with a desire for stronger language on cooperation regarding trade imbalances [2] - The discussions among G7 members were described as friendly, indicating a united front despite tensions related to U.S. tariffs [2] - The outcome of the summit was viewed positively by Canadian Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne, highlighting a collective determination to work together during a critical historical moment [2]

特朗普的决策将左右收购案的走向（REUTERS） 美国外国投资委员会（CFIUS）对日本制铁收购美国钢铁的重新审查预计于5月21日结束。在CFIUS向 特朗普汇报后，特朗普将在15天内做出决定。日本制铁已向美国政府打出了大幅增加对美设备投资这张 王牌…… 围绕日本制铁收购美国钢铁（US Steel）的计划，美国政府的重新审查已进入需由总统特朗 普做出最终决定的阶段。预计相关部门将在完成审查后，向特朗普汇报意见。焦点在于特朗 普是否认可日铁不断增加的收购条件有助于复兴美国制造业。 特朗普4月7日命令美国政府在45天内对日铁的收购计划进行重新审查。美国外国投资委员会 （CFIUS）将在完成审查后，向特朗普汇报审查内容。汇报后，特朗普将在15天内做出决 定。 同样在2024年12月，日铁向美国方面提出了一个提案，承诺在收购完成后的10年内未经 CFIUS批准不会关闭美国钢铁的设施，且维持现有产能。但就在此后拜登发布了停止收购的命 令。 日本经济新闻（中文版：日经中文网）八十岛绫平 华盛顿报道 版权声明：日本经济新闻社版权所有，未经授权不得转载或部分复制，违者必究。 对于特朗普来说，没有理由不欢迎外资增加投资。他以振 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the implications of the recent US-China Geneva trade talks, highlighting the significant reduction of tariffs by both countries and the broader context of the US's retreat from global economic engagement while simultaneously seeking to maintain control over international trade dynamics [2][4][6]. Group 1: US-China Trade Relations - The US and China agreed to mutually cancel 91% of their additional tariffs, with the US also suspending 24% of "reciprocal tariffs" [2]. - This agreement is seen as a response to the expectations of producers and consumers in both countries, aligning with their interests and those of the global community [2]. Group 2: US Economic Isolation - Over the past 20 years, the US economy has gradually distanced itself from the global economy, with a notable decline in trade dependency compared to the global average [7][9]. - The US's trade agreements from 2000 to 2023 (14 agreements) lag significantly behind the EU (49), China (22), and Japan (19), indicating a reduced engagement in international trade [9][10]. Group 3: Investment Trends - From 2014 to 2023, the US has seen limited greenfield investment, with most years failing to exceed $10 billion, contrasting sharply with the EU's performance [10][11]. - The share of US companies in global foreign investment has dropped from a historical peak of 30% to a record low of 14% in 2023, reflecting a trend of reduced overseas engagement [11]. Group 4: Political and Economic Dynamics - The rise of economic inequality in the US has fueled populism, leading to a political narrative that blames external factors for domestic economic issues [13][18]. - Both major political parties in the US have shifted towards emphasizing industrial policy and trade restrictions, aiming to create more domestic manufacturing jobs and reduce reliance on foreign economies [18][20]. Group 5: Global Trade Landscape - The article suggests that the US's attempts to regain control over global trade through tariffs may backfire, as other nations are less likely to acquiesce to US pressure [27]. - The absence of US participation in global trade may not lead to a collapse of the economic order; instead, it could encourage other countries to establish alternative cooperative mechanisms [27][28].

Group 1: Inflation and Consumption Dynamics - The likelihood of experiencing simultaneous goods inflation and service deflation is low, as historical data shows no such occurrence in the U.S. since 1947[3][4][26] - From 1993 to 2024, the share of actual consumption of goods in the U.S. is projected to rise from 27.5% to 34%, while the share of services is expected to decline from 72.5% to 66%[3][4] - Service prices exhibit greater rigidity compared to goods prices, making service deflation unlikely even during economic downturns[4][18][26] Group 2: Wholesale and Retail Profit Margins - The markup in the U.S. wholesale and retail sectors is high, with 14 out of 23 industries having markups greater than 30%[5][29] - However, the profit margins in these sectors are lower than those in other private industries, with operating surplus to total output at 25.2% compared to 25.4% for the private sector overall[5][29] - S&P 500 retail companies show lower average gross and net profit margins (38% and 8.2%, respectively) compared to the overall index averages (45.5% and 22.2%) [6][35] Group 3: Inventory and Import Dynamics - The inventory-to-sales ratio in the U.S. remains low, with most industries having a ratio of only 1-2 months[7][43] - In Q1 2025, the U.S. experienced a significant increase in imports, with an annualized rate of approximately $3.31 trillion, marking a 50.9% quarter-over-quarter increase[7][36] - The wholesale sector showed the most significant inventory replenishment, with an average quarter-over-quarter growth of 0.6%[7][36] Group 4: Corporate Responses to Tariffs - A majority of U.S. manufacturers (87%) indicated they would need to raise prices in response to tariff costs, with 76% of manufacturers and retailers choosing to pass on costs to consumers[10][48] - Adjustments in supply chains and pricing strategies are the primary responses to tariffs, with significant differences noted between U.S. and Chinese companies[10][53] Group 5: Historical Context of Tariffs - Current tariffs may lead to overall rates that are comparable to or exceed those of the early 1930s, but the economic context differs significantly from that period[11][57] - The 1930 tariff led to deflation rather than inflation, contrasting with the potential inflationary effects of current tariffs[11][57]

Group 1 - The U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent emphasized the need for the U.S. to strengthen its leadership role in the IMF and World Bank, focusing on transparency in exchange rate policies and debt management [1] - Bessent stated that the distribution of Special Drawing Rights (SDR) by the IMF should align more closely with U.S. interests, rather than benefiting large, financially strong countries [1] Group 2 - During a congressional hearing, concerns were raised about who would bear the cost of tariffs, with Democratic Congressman Mark Pocan suggesting that consumers would ultimately pay for Trump's tariffs [2] - Bessent indicated that the Trump administration is considering tariff exemptions for certain baby products, including car seats and cribs, in response to the financial burden on American families [2] - The Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA) reported that over 70% of baby products purchased in the U.S. are produced in China, leading to increased costs for American families due to tariffs [2] Group 3 - JPMA predicts that if Trump does not alter his tariff policy, prices for baby products could rise by approximately 30%, with specific tariffs on baby furniture averaging 129%, toys at 113%, and baby clothing at 41% [3] - Some retailers have already begun raising prices on children's products, with Nuna increasing the price of its baby stroller and car seat by $100 and $50 respectively, and UPPAbaby raising its stroller price from $899 to $1200 [3]