北京商报讯（记者 岳品瑜 董晗萱）6月6日，在"2025中银全球走进昌平——融通世界·智启未来"活动上，中银证券首席 经济学家徐高阐述了其对于当前中国经济形势的观点及未来展望。 近期中美经贸高层互动释放积极信号，但贸易战的深层矛盾与影响仍在持续发酵。徐高指出，特朗普政府发起贸易战的 根本目标在于压缩美国巨额贸易逆差，其逻辑是将制造业岗位流失归咎于贸易伙伴。然而，历史数据揭示了一个关键矛 盾：美国的贸易赤字问题早在20世纪80年代就已凸显，远早于中国深度融入全球贸易体系，将赤字主因归于中国缺乏充 分依据。 值得注意的是，中国拥有显著的内部缓冲空间。徐高表示，近年来经济下行压力主要源于国内周期性因素，特别是房地 产市场的调整。目前，一系列稳地产政策已开始显现效果。只要房地产市场逐步企稳，国内巨大的内需潜力足以缓冲外 需走弱的影响。中国作为内需潜力远未充分释放的大型经济体，在政策刺激方面拥有广阔的回旋余地。 面对这场由美方挑起的贸易摩擦，中国需做好"持久战"的心理与战略准备。"中美之间正在进行'懦夫博弈'，狭路相逢勇 者胜，'下策'绝不可能被接受。"徐高强调，基于过往交锋经验，对特朗普政府的极限施压策略采取退让姿态 ...

聚烯烃：短期或反弹，但趋势仍有压力 国泰君安期货研究所·张驰 投资咨询从业资格号：Z0011243 国泰君安期货研究所·陈嘉昕 投资咨询从业资格号：Z0020481 日期：2025年6月8日 Guotai Junan Futures all rights reserved, please do not reprint CONTENTS 综述 01 聚丙烯供需 02 聚乙烯供需 03 Special report on Guotai Junan Futures 2 综述 1 LLDPE观点：短期震荡为主 Special report on Guotai Junan Futures 5 资料来源：国泰君安期货研究 PP：短期或反弹 但趋势仍有压力 ◆ 首先、贸易战因素变换频繁，正因如此当下市场当方面持续下跌在宏观端概率不大，反而在谈判临近尾 声需要警惕。在供应端，6月检修仍偏高，但目前检修量不足以改变供需格局，新增产能大大抵消了供应 端的努力。成本端仍有压力因此短期市场或以震荡市为主，但趋势仍有压力； Special report on Guotai Junan Futures 4 资料来源：国泰君安期货研究 ◆ ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles indicates that while U.S. stock markets are experiencing a strong upward trend, there are concerns about potential profit-taking risks due to economic uncertainties and trade tensions [1][6][7] - The S&P 500 index has regained the 6000-point mark, approaching the historical high set in February, driven by robust non-farm payroll data that has boosted market confidence [1][6] - Several institutions have raised their year-end targets for major U.S. stock indices, with Deutsche Bank increasing the S&P 500 target from 6150 to 6550, although they caution about potential instability in future upward trends [6][7] Group 2 - Recent data suggests signs of cooling in the U.S. economy, with the Atlanta Fed's GDPNow tool revising Q2 GDP growth down from 4.6% to 3.8% [3] - The labor market shows signs of weakness, with a decline in labor demand and companies hesitant to hire due to trade war uncertainties [3][4] - The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield has risen to a critical level of 4.50%, driven by better-than-expected employment reports, which could indicate improved long-term growth expectations [8]

Economic Performance Overview - The economic performance of the three major global economic centers for Q1 2025 has been officially released, with the US GDP showing a slight quarter-on-quarter decline of 0.06% but a year-on-year increase of 2%, reaching $73,231 billion [1] - The European Union's nominal GDP for Q1 2025 was €46,123.756 billion (approximately $48,538 billion), reflecting a year-on-year growth of 1.6% after adjusting for price fluctuations [3] - China's economy grew by 5.4% year-on-year in Q1 2025, significantly outperforming both the US and EU, driven by state-led large project investments and preemptive export activities due to trade war concerns [3] Comparative Analysis - The US economy remains more dynamic and innovative compared to the EU, which is experiencing structural weaknesses due to stagnant production efficiency and high energy costs [3] - China's nominal GDP in Q1 2025 reached ¥318,758 billion, but when converted to USD using the exchange rate method, it amounted to only $44,420.5 billion, falling behind both the US and EU [4] - The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that the purchasing power parity (PPP) ratio for the Chinese yuan against the US dollar in 2025 is 3.43, indicating that goods priced at $100 in the US would cost ¥343 in China [6][8] GDP Calculation Methods - The article discusses three methods for calculating GDP: exchange rate method, purchasing power parity, and a mixed method that combines both [5][11] - Under the purchasing power method, China's Q1 2025 GDP would be $92,932.36 billion, which is 2.1 times higher than the exchange rate method figure [8] - The mixed method, which allocates 60% to the exchange rate method and 40% to the purchasing power method, results in China's GDP being $63,928 billion for Q1 2025, surpassing the EU's GDP of $61,576.4 billion [12][13] GDP Rankings - According to the exchange rate method, the GDP rankings for Q1 2025 are: US ($73,231 billion), EU ($48,538 billion), and China ($44,420.5 billion) [12] - When using the purchasing power method, the rankings change to: China ($92,932.36 billion), US ($73,231 billion), and EU ($70,268.72 billion) [12] - The mixed method rankings place the US first ($73,231 billion), followed by China ($63,928 billion) and the EU ($61,576.4 billion) [13]

Group 1 - The U.S. beef may enter Australia for the first time since 2003 as the Australian government prepares to negotiate tariffs with Trump, potentially easing the ban on U.S. beef imports due to mad cow disease risks [1] - The Australian government is pushing for the U.S. to lift a 50% tariff on Australian steel and aluminum, as well as a 10% tariff on all other goods, with Trade Minister Don Farrell requesting the removal of tariffs on all Australian products [1] - Trump has publicly commented on Australia's ban on U.S. beef, making it a focal point in tariff negotiations, indicating that the U.S. is also imposing similar restrictions [1] Group 2 - Amid the ongoing U.S.-China trade war, Australian beef is increasingly replacing U.S. beef in Chinese supermarkets, with a notable consumer preference for Australian beef due to perceived quality [3] - Data from Meat and Livestock Australia (MLA) shows a significant increase in Australian beef exports to China, with February and March exports rising nearly 40% year-on-year, and April exports reaching a record 37,000 tons [6] - The U.S. beef export trade to China, which once reached $1.6 billion, has nearly stalled due to mutual tariffs, with most U.S. beef products now unable to enter the Chinese market [6]

欧洲央行执委Isabel Schnabel称，对美联储与欧洲央行政策将长期分化的预期是错误的。"我预计贸易战 将对全球需求和供应都产生冲击——我们可以讨论这两者对通胀的影响哪个更大，因为这将决定最终的 净影响，"Schnabel周六表示，"但无论如何我都预计，不会发生持续脱钩这种事，市场定价也反映出了 这一点。" ...

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. International Trade Court's ruling against the Trump administration's tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act has significant implications for U.S. trade policy and global trade dynamics [1][4][6]. Summary by Sections Trump's Tariff Policy - In February, the Trump administration imposed tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, citing the need to protect domestic industries and adjust trade balances [1][3]. - The tariffs included a 10% baseline tariff on all imports starting April 5, with higher tariffs for countries with significant trade deficits, set to begin on April 9 [1][3]. Impact of Tariffs - Despite a 12% decrease in Chinese exports to the U.S. from 2018 to 2024, the U.S. trade deficit with China increased by 11% to $361 billion in 2024 compared to 2017 [3]. - The International Monetary Fund (IMF) revised its global economic growth forecast down from 3.3% to 2.8% for 2025, reflecting the negative impact of the trade war [3]. Court Ruling - The U.S. International Trade Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose global tariffs, leading to the permanent prohibition of the tariffs [4][6]. - The ruling was initiated by lawsuits from five small businesses and twelve states, arguing that the tariffs were enacted without congressional approval [4][6]. Implications for the Trump Administration - The ruling represents a significant setback for the Trump administration, which relied on tariffs as a key tool for negotiating trade deals and promoting its "America First" policy [6]. - The White House announced plans to appeal the ruling, questioning the legitimacy of judicial intervention in national emergency policies [6]. Broader Political and Global Trade Impact - The ruling intensifies the conflict between executive and judicial powers in the U.S., as tariff imposition is constitutionally a congressional power [8]. - While the ruling may create short-term uncertainty in U.S. trade policy, it could potentially stabilize global trade in the long run, depending on the outcome of the appeal [8].

据报道，中方停收美国波音飞机后，特朗普失态怒吼"中方违约"！这场看似突然的风波，背后藏着怎样 的大国博弈？ 最近，美国政坛和经济领域可谓是"乱成一锅粥"。5月28日，美国国际贸易法庭作出重磅裁决，判定特 朗普引用1977年《国际紧急经济权力法》加征关税的做法超越权限。像对加拿大、墨西哥、中国征收的 芬太尼相关关税，以及对全球征收的"对等关税"等多项关税均被裁定违法，特朗普政府需在10日内暂停 加征关税程序。可特朗普政府哪肯轻易认输，马上提起上诉，上诉法院也批准关税"暂时维持"，这场关 于关税的法律拉锯战，让美国关税政策充满了不确定性。 特朗普（资料图） 这边关税问题还没解决，那边特朗普又在5月30日突然宣布，要将进口钢铝关税上调至50%。这一举动 让美国的关税政策再次急转弯，也让国际社会看得目瞪口呆。其实，美国的关税政策反复无常已经不是 一天两天了。4月初，美国政府先是宣布征收"对等关税"，结果转头就主动暂停，说是为谈判创造缓和 空间；在和欧盟谈判时，也是先放话提前终止协商、直接征税，没几天又"改口"恢复期限。这种朝令夕 改的做法，让各国企业都无所适从，也让美国在国际上的信誉大打折扣。 而美国在对华贸易上，更 ...

Core Viewpoint - China has implemented export control measures on rare earths, which aligns with international practices and is not aimed at any specific country. However, this has led to concerns among Western companies about potential production disruptions, with some media speculating about the "weaponization" of rare earths by China [1][2]. Group 1: Export Control Measures - China is establishing an export licensing system for rare earths, which will allow it to monitor the global supply chain more closely [1]. - The new tracking system requires producers to submit additional information, including transaction volumes and customer names, indicating a more targeted approach to trade [1][6]. - Analysts suggest that this system is a strategic response to U.S. export control policies, reflecting a shift in China's trade strategy [2][6]. Group 2: Global Supply Chain Impact - China currently dominates the global rare earth market, accounting for over 60% of production and 92% of processing, indicating a near-monopoly in the refining stage [4][6]. - The export controls have raised concerns among global automotive manufacturers, with reports of production line shutdowns in Europe due to inventory shortages [6]. - Companies are experiencing delays in obtaining export licenses, which could lead to significant production interruptions [6][7]. Group 3: Strategic Implications - The new export control measures are seen as a way for China to exert influence over the U.S. and other countries, particularly in the context of ongoing trade negotiations [6][7]. - Analysts face challenges in tracking the approval speed of export licenses, as data is not publicly available, complicating the understanding of the situation [7]. - The measures are perceived as a means for China to gain leverage in international trade discussions, particularly regarding technology controls [6][7].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the conflict between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, highlighting the implications of the "Beautiful Bill" and the 899 clause, which grants Trump significant power to impose taxes on foreign entities, potentially escalating into a global financial war [1][28][29]. Group 1: The "Beautiful Bill" - The "Beautiful Bill" aims to reduce taxes by approximately $4.6 trillion over the next decade while increasing the national deficit by $3.2 trillion, which represents a 15% increase [12][13]. - It proposes a $1.6 trillion spending cut, primarily affecting medical assistance programs, which could harm low-income individuals [13][26]. - The bill's tax cuts are skewed towards high-income groups, with low-income individuals benefiting less, creating a paradoxical outcome [14]. Group 2: The 899 Clause - The 899 clause allows the U.S. government to impose additional taxes on foreign entities if they are deemed to have discriminatory tax practices against U.S. businesses [29][30]. - It specifically targets three types of taxes: digital services tax, profit-shifting tax, and OECD global minimum tax, which could affect many countries, particularly in the EU [31][33]. - The clause grants the U.S. Treasury Secretary broad authority to define what constitutes "unfair taxation," effectively giving the government "unlimited firepower" in trade disputes [34]. Group 3: Implications for Foreign Investment - The implementation of the 899 clause could lead to significant financial repercussions for foreign investors, including increased taxation on dividends and interest, potentially reducing their returns on U.S. investments [36][38]. - The clause may deter foreign investment in the U.S., as investors might sell off U.S. assets in response to perceived threats, leading to a decline in the stock market and an increase in U.S. Treasury yields [40][41]. - Analysts predict that the stock market could drop by 10% and the dollar could depreciate by up to 5% if the 899 clause is fully enacted [41]. Group 4: Impact on Tesla and the Clean Energy Sector - The "Beautiful Bill" threatens Tesla's profitability by planning to phase out tax credits for electric vehicles, which could significantly impact Tesla's earnings [23][24]. - The conflict between Musk and Trump reflects broader tensions between traditional energy interests and the clean energy sector, with potential implications for future legislation [45][46].