反击特朗普关税，印度罕见用上了中国方式，印度对特朗普的关税施压采取了怎样的反击行动？印度两架专机将降落俄罗斯，这背后又传递出怎样的信号？ 美国当地时间8月4日，特朗普在其社交媒体"真实社交"发文，又一次严厉谴责印度购买俄罗斯石油，并且大肆在公开市场上出售赚取暴利。以此为由，特朗 普宣布将大幅提高对印度的关税。 按照特朗普的说法，美国首先要因为"对等关税"向印度征收25%的关税，并在这个基础上大幅增加额外的惩罚性关税。 恰好在7月31日的联合国安理会上，中国常驻联合国副代表耿爽在驳斥美方代表的抹黑时也提到，中国和俄罗斯、乌克兰都保持着正常的贸易往来，轮不到 美国长臂管辖。而且直到今天，美国还保持着同俄罗斯的贸易往来，美国自己在做的事情，为什么却不让他国去做？ 然而令美国没想到的是，面对特朗普的极限施压，印度这一次没有选择直接服软，反而是激起了强硬的反抗，印度也终于用明确的表态和实际行动，开始对 美国的关税威胁说不。 更罕见的是，印度的反击方式，竟然还与中方有着高度类似之处。 首先，印度外交部的驳斥，沿用了中方的逻辑。 在特朗普发出最新威胁后，印度外交部当天便作出了驳斥，主要传递出两个观点。 一方面，印度低价购买 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration has expanded the scope of tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to include hundreds of derivative products, with a 50% tariff set to take effect on August 18, 2023 [1] Group 1: Tariff Details - The U.S. Department of Commerce announced the addition of 407 product codes to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, which will incur extra tariffs due to their steel and aluminum content [1] - The expanded tariff list primarily includes intermediate and semi-finished products containing steel and aluminum, as well as metal structures, containers, and fasteners made from these materials [1] Group 2: Impact on China’s Steel Exports - In 2024, China's steel export volume is projected to be 111 million tons, with only 470,000 tons directly exported to the U.S., accounting for 0.4% of total exports [2] - The direct impact of the tariff policy on China's steel exports is minimal, but indirect exports may be affected due to a high proportion of steel being routed through third countries [2] - China's steel exports to Vietnam, a significant intermediary for U.S. exports, are expected to decline, with an estimated impact on transshipment trade of around 3 million tons annually [2] Group 3: Broader Industry Implications - The tariff policy may lead to a decrease in China's steel exports, negatively affecting related products such as steel billets and plates [3] - Industries heavily reliant on steel, such as construction machinery, home appliances, and new energy vehicles, may experience noticeable export impacts due to their high demand for steel, particularly plates [3] - An estimated 14.5 million tons of steel may be indirectly exported to the U.S. through steel derivatives in 2024 [3] Group 4: Market Reactions - The futures market may react negatively to the tariff policy, with expectations of weakened demand and increased inventory levels in the steel market [4] - The price difference between rebar and wire rod has widened significantly, indicating potential market volatility due to the tariff impacts [4] - Despite the tariff policy, domestic macroeconomic and industrial policies are expected to have a more significant influence on the futures market, with a continued upward trend anticipated in the steel and coal industries [4]

Core Viewpoint - Trump's tariff policies, initially celebrated as a success, have led to significant stock market declines, undermining his claims of economic improvement [1][5][10] Group 1: Tariff Policy Impact - Trump's tariff diplomacy has caused dissatisfaction among various countries, with tariffs ranging from 15% to 50% imposed by allies and other nations [3] - The ongoing negotiations with China are complicated by China's control over rare earth materials, making it difficult for Trump to achieve a decisive victory in tariff negotiations [3][9] - The recent stock market crash, including a 0.74% drop in the Dow Jones and a significant decline in the Nasdaq, is closely linked to Trump's tariff policies [5][7] Group 2: Economic Consequences - The tariffs have led to rising domestic prices and increased business costs in the U.S., contributing to weakened consumer and employment power [8] - Despite Trump's calls for the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates to stimulate the economy, the Fed has not complied, leading to increased pressure on the U.S. economy [8] - Job growth has fallen short of expectations, with only 70,000 new jobs added in July compared to the anticipated 100,000 [8] Group 3: Future Outlook - Trump is unlikely to abandon his tariff strategy, viewing it as essential for economic recovery and political leverage, especially in the context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict [9][10] - The effectiveness of Trump's tariff policies remains uncertain, particularly in dealing with a powerful economy like China, which is prepared for ongoing economic competition [9][10] - The long-term success of Trump's tariff strategy will be influenced by the overall direction of the U.S. economy and global economic changes [10]

Group 1 - The trade war initiated by former President Trump has led to ongoing turmoil in the global trade order, significantly impacting various industries and eliciting strong domestic opposition in the U.S. [1][3] - Trump's "America First" policy has resulted in multiple rounds of tariffs on goods from different countries, with a notable increase in tariffs on Chinese goods totaling 20% in early 2025, followed by further escalations affecting Japan, the EU, Switzerland, India, and Brazil [3][5] - The latest threat involves potential new tariffs on steel and chips, which could escalate to rates as high as 300%, causing panic among global enterprises, particularly in Southeast Asia [5][7] Group 2 - The semiconductor industry is under significant pressure, with the U.S. importing $46.3 billion worth of semiconductors in 2024, primarily from Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam, while China accounts for only 3% [7] - The steel industry is also facing challenges, with the U.S. importing 28.86 million tons of steel in 2024, a 2.5% increase from 2023, with major suppliers including Canada, Brazil, Mexico, South Korea, and Vietnam [7] - Trump's tariffs have sparked strong backlash domestically, with a Pew Research Center survey indicating only 38% support for his policies, and 61% opposition, reflecting a decline in approval ratings [7][8] Group 3 - The interplay between Trump's tariff policies and the Federal Reserve's interest rate decisions complicates the economic landscape, as rising import costs from tariffs contribute to inflation, making it difficult for the Fed to lower rates [8]

这次代表团是自特朗普四月份发起新一轮"关税战争"以来，派遣的最高级别商务代表团。显然，特朗普试图通过双管齐下的策略来"拿下"中国，无论是 通过官方会谈还是民间交流，这都是他迫切重启经济对话的重要一步，渴望让一切尽快尘埃落定。 经过半年的斗争，特朗普的奢望终于以失败收场。为了让结果不至于过于尴尬，他下令分头行动，力求在接下来的几天内"征服"中国。 几小时前，中国的专机已顺利抵达瑞典，准备举行中美瑞典三方会谈。这是自今年2月特朗普上任后首次宣布对华征收额外关税以来，双方进行的第三 轮贸易谈判。 这一时刻尤为重要。首先，特朗普已执政半年，过去的这个阶段完全反映了他的治理能力。其次，关于"对等关税"的生效日期正迅速逼近。而更值得注 意的是，在与中国进行这轮谈判之前，特朗普出人意料地与欧盟达成了一项贸易协议，尽管之前他对欧盟毫无好感。 这一系列举动表明，特朗普显然急切地希望达成与中国的协议，努力将中国这个"巨头"收入囊中。美国和欧盟之间的贸易协议，或许更多是为了施加压 力于中国，期望在中美谈判中促使其做出让步。 总体来看，这些现象都凸显了特朗普及美国当前的困境。在这一轮谈判中，中国掌握着主导权。美国代表团依然由美国财政 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the significant market turmoil following the Trump administration's announcement of "reciprocal tariffs," which led to a sharp decline in U.S. and global stock markets, highlighting the potential long-term economic implications of such trade policies [1][8][31]. Group 1: Market Reaction - U.S. stock markets experienced their largest single-day drop since 2020, with a total market value loss exceeding $6 trillion within two trading days [8][12]. - Major global markets, including Australia, South Korea, Japan, and Europe, faced severe declines, with Australia's S&P index plummeting by 6.4% and South Korea's index triggering a trading halt [12][13][21]. - The Singapore Strait Times index fell by 8.5% within 20 minutes, and European indices like Germany's DAX and the UK's FTSE saw declines exceeding 4% [13][21]. Group 2: Government Response - U.S. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin downplayed the market volatility, asserting that short-term fluctuations should not be a concern and emphasizing a focus on long-term prosperity [3][8]. - Mnuchin claimed that Trump's tariff strategy has created significant negotiation leverage, with over 50 countries reportedly seeking trade negotiations with the U.S. [5][15]. - Despite the optimistic rhetoric, there is skepticism regarding the actual progress of these negotiations, as specific details remain undisclosed [15][36]. Group 3: Economic Implications - The tariffs are expected to have a detrimental impact on global commodity demand, affecting various industries and leading to significant stock price drops for companies like SK Hynix and BHP [19][21]. - Analysts warn that the ongoing trade conflict could result in a 0.3% reduction in U.S. GDP and an increase in the unemployment rate to 5.3% [31]. - The article highlights the potential for economic isolation for the U.S. as other countries may resist accepting what they perceive as "unequal treaties" [40][43]. Group 4: Internal Discontent - There are indications of internal discord within the Trump administration regarding trade policies, with some officials expressing concerns about the long-term economic consequences of the tariffs [25][36]. - Mnuchin's public support for Trump's strategy contrasts with reports of his personal frustrations with the tariff calculations, suggesting a potential for resignation [25][36]. Group 5: Global Trade Dynamics - The article notes that the tariffs have prompted retaliatory measures from countries like China, which announced a 34% tariff on U.S. goods, directly impacting critical sectors such as semiconductors and defense [31][38]. - The global trade landscape is shifting, with countries like Australia and New Zealand expressing significant distress over the economic fallout from U.S. policies, leading to currency depreciation and market instability [34][43].

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration's "reciprocal tariff" policy signifies a fundamental restructuring of global power dynamics, capital flow logic, and trade philosophy, transitioning the U.S. from a proponent of free trade to a gatekeeper of market access through high tariffs [2][17]. Trade Policy Shift - The U.S. trade policy has shifted from "free trade" to "access trade," where market entry requires high fees, redefining trade relationships as a "pay-to-enter" mechanism [2][4]. - The "America First" and "fair trade" paradox highlights the contradiction in Trump's protectionist approach aimed at achieving "fair trade" while claiming to rectify perceived unfair treatment in globalization [3][9]. Unilateralism vs. Multilateralism - Trump's skepticism towards multilateral trade systems like the WTO has driven the shift to "access trade," advocating for bilateral negotiations to maximize unilateral benefits [3][6]. - The strategy employs economic pressure to force compliance from trade partners, effectively turning trade negotiations into a form of economic coercion [6][9]. Tariff Mechanism - The "reciprocal tariff" policy has evolved from punitive tariffs targeting specific economies to a universal market access mechanism, with an average tariff rate rising to 15.2%, the highest since the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1934 [4][5]. - Tariffs are now standardized and categorized based on trade deficits and geopolitical stances, with countries facing differentiated rates [5][6]. Geopolitical Implications - Tariffs are increasingly used as tools for geopolitical leverage, with the U.S. applying pressure on countries like India and Canada to align with its strategic interests [6][9]. - The policy has prompted multinational corporations to reassess their global supply chains, leading to a "re-anchoring" of production closer to the U.S. or in low-tariff regions [7][9]. Dollar Dominance and Economic Coercion - The "access trade" strategy leverages the U.S. market and dollar dominance, transforming trade negotiations into a form of economic extortion, where countries must accumulate dollar reserves to pay tariffs [8][9]. - This approach effectively upgrades the concept of "seigniorage" into a "storage tax," embedding the U.S. fee-collecting power into global capital flows [8][9]. Global Trade Dynamics - The "reciprocal tariff" policy is reshaping global trade dynamics, with countries either accelerating their integration into the U.S. market or diversifying away from it, leading to a potential "de-Americanization" of trade [13][14]. - The policy has resulted in a significant decline in U.S. exports to China, while trade with other regions like ASEAN and the EU has seen growth, indicating a shift towards a more diversified trade network [13][14]. Long-term Economic Consequences - The long-term economic costs of the "reciprocal tariff" policy include slowed global growth and increased inflationary pressures, with the IMF predicting a global growth rate of 3% for 2025, down from earlier forecasts [11][12]. - The policy's impact on consumer prices is significant, with average effective tariff rates reaching 18.3%, leading to increased costs for American households [12][13]. Domestic Political Landscape - The "reciprocal tariff" policy creates a conflict between short-term political gains and long-term economic risks, as it may win support from manufacturing voters while imposing costs on consumers and small businesses [16][17]. - The protectionist measures may ultimately lead to economic imbalances, as the burden of increased costs is disproportionately felt by lower-income households [16][17].

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration argues that a court ruling against tariffs could undermine the President's foreign policy, jeopardize recent trade agreements, and harm the U.S. economy [3][4][7] Group 1: Legal Context and Arguments - The Trump administration is appealing a ruling that stated the President does not have "unlimited power" to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [6][9] - The administration's legal team claims that tariffs are necessary to prevent a "financial collapse" and warns of potential economic recession if tariffs are overturned [7][11] - Experts suggest that if the Supreme Court rules against the Trump administration, it may lead to the refund of tariffs, impacting government revenue [6][12] Group 2: Economic Implications - As of the current fiscal year, U.S. tariff revenue has reached $142 billion, but it only accounts for 3.1% of total federal revenue [4][12] - Economists argue that the loss of tariff revenue is unlikely to cause a catastrophic economic downturn, as the U.S. government has significant debt and the tariffs do not directly fund social security or Medicare [11][12] - The current U.S. national debt is approaching $37 trillion, making tariff revenue a minor factor in the overall fiscal situation [12] Group 3: Political and Strategic Considerations - The Trump administration's strategy appears to be aimed at acting quickly on tariff issues to prevent the Supreme Court from overturning them, as the consequences could be severe [13] - Small businesses challenging the government argue that the President has other means to achieve trade goals, such as submitting agreements for Congressional approval [13]

Consumption Data - In July, the total retail sales of consumer goods increased by 3.7% year-on-year, marking a decline of 1.1 percentage points from the previous month and the lowest monthly growth rate this year[3] - Retail sales of automobiles fell by 1.5% year-on-year, a significant drop of 6.1 percentage points compared to June, closely linked to the recent downturn in the real estate market[3] - Retail sales of communication equipment rose by 14.9%, while home appliances and furniture grew by 28.7% and 20.6%, respectively, despite declines from June[3] Investment and Real Estate - Fixed asset investment saw a sharp decline of 5.3% year-on-year in July, the largest drop since April 2020[4] - Real estate development investment fell by 17.0% year-on-year, the lowest since December 2022, indicating a renewed acceleration in market adjustments[4] - The area of residential sales decreased by 7.1% year-on-year, remaining at a low level despite a slight improvement[5] Industrial Production - The industrial added value growth rate fell to 5.7% year-on-year, down 1.1 percentage points, with the mining and manufacturing sectors also experiencing declines[6] - The automotive manufacturing sector saw a significant drop of 2.9 percentage points to 8.5%, the lowest since November 2024, reflecting the combined effects of supply-side policies and demand cooling[6] Policy Implications - The simultaneous cooling of retail, investment, and real estate markets in July may signal the need for policy measures in the second half of the year[6] - The central government may need to implement larger subsidies for durable goods consumption and consider a small interest rate cut of 10 basis points to stabilize the real estate market[6]

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration argues that a court ruling against tariffs could undermine U.S. foreign policy, threaten recent trade agreements, and harm the U.S. economy, warning of potential financial collapse if tariffs are overturned [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings and Arguments - The Trump administration has appealed a ruling from the International Trade Court that stated the President does not have "unlimited power" to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [3]. - Trump's legal team claims that the IEEPA allows the President to take extraordinary measures to regulate trade, which they interpret as the authority to impose tariffs [3]. - If the court rules against the Trump administration, it could lead to refunds for importers, as the Justice Department has acknowledged the possibility of refunds if tariffs are deemed illegal [3][4]. Group 2: Economic Implications - The Trump administration warns that losing the tariff case could lead to a financial collapse, with potential consequences likened to the Great Depression [4]. - Current tariff revenues have reached $142 billion in the fiscal year, but they only account for 3.1% of total federal revenue projected for fiscal year 2025 [1]. - Experts argue that the loss of tariff revenue is unlikely to cause a catastrophic economic downturn, as the U.S. government has significant debt and the tariffs do not directly fund social security or Medicare [7][8]. Group 3: Political and Strategic Considerations - The Trump administration's legal strategy appears to be aimed at maintaining tariffs to avoid perceived negative consequences, with some legal experts suggesting that the administration is trying to act quickly to prevent the Supreme Court from overturning tariffs [9]. - The administration emphasizes the importance of recent trade agreements with major partners, warning that unfavorable court rulings could jeopardize these agreements and lead to significant economic repercussions [4][5].