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]

然而，其他国家则面临着巨大的压力。2024年，美国进口了价值463亿美元的半导体产品，其中64%来自马来西亚、中国台湾、泰国和越南，而中国大 陆仅占3%。美国一年进口超过600亿美元的芯片，主要来自中国台湾（113亿美元）、马来西亚、以色列、韩国和爱尔兰。如果特朗普真的将半导体和芯 片关税提高到300%，马来西亚、泰国、越南等东南亚国家的半导体产业将遭受重创。 席卷全球的关税风暴：特朗普的贸易战争与美国经济的困局 2025年，全球贸易秩序因美国前总统特朗普的关税政策而持续动荡。这场风暴的中心，正是特朗普屡屡挥舞的关税大棒，其影响波及全球，甚至引发了 美国国内的强烈反对。 这场关税战争并非突发事件。自上任伊始，特朗普便以其标志性的"美国优先"政策为旗帜，频繁对不同国家和行业祭出关税大棒。2025年2月和3月，他 以"芬太尼"问题为由，对中国商品加征了两轮关税，总计20%，为这场贸易战拉开了序幕。此后，4月2日，他宣布实施"对等关税"，即以彼之道还施彼 身，引发全球贸易圈的强烈震动。 然而，这只是暴风雨前的宁静。4月9日，特朗普宣布给予各贸易伙伴90天的宽限期，期间仅征收10%的基础关税，让全球企业短暂地松了一口 ...

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 ...

在特朗普政府针对全球无差别攻击，宣布"对等关税"之后，美股应声跳水，创下2020年以来的最大单日跌幅。全球股市也因此受到了影响，澳韩日欧股市接 连崩盘。 可谁也没想到，就在这样一个危机之下，美国官方却展现出"稳如泰山"的姿态。财政部长贝森特在接受采访时直言："短期波动无需在意，我们的目标是建 立长期繁荣。" 他甚至放话称，特朗普的关税策略"创造了史上最大的谈判筹码"，骄傲的表示已有50多个国家主动找上门寻求贸易谈判。 短短两个交易日，美股总市值蒸发超过6万亿美元，无数普通美国人的退休金账户瞬间缩水。临近退休的群体尤为焦虑，很多美国人攒了半辈子的钱，一觉 醒来少了个零。 如此一个关乎美国民众生活水平的难题，贝森特对此轻描淡写，称真正聪明的投资者不会盯着每日涨跌。他坚称股市是长期投资，短期的"过山车"无关痛 痒。 不过，市场的反应显然比官方表态更诚实，英国《金融时报》披露： 亚太股市在政策公布后集体"躺平"，澳大利亚S&P指数开盘暴跌6.4%，新西兰股市下挫3.5%，韩国综合股价指数触发熔断机制，台湾地区股市更 是跌近10%。 就连新加坡海峡时报指数也在20分钟内狂泻8.5%，银行股几乎全线崩盘。 欧洲市场同样未 ...

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]

作为诉讼的一部分，企业还要求美国政府退还其已缴纳的关税费用。 特朗普政府在向华盛顿特区联邦巡回上诉法院提交的最新材料中辩称，反对关税的裁决将削弱美国总统 的外交政策，危及近期达成的贸易协议，并损害美国经济。 美国总统特朗普上周在社交媒体上警告称，如果法院判决他败诉，这些巨额资金将"永远不可能收回或 偿还"，并补充说，损失可能引发"大萧条"。 此前，作为诉讼的一部分，企业还要求美国政府退还其已缴纳的关税费用。 但许多预算专家对特朗普政府关于关税收入可能令美国经济出现重大损失的说法提出反对。据美国财政 部数据显示，截至目前，美国本财政年度累计关税收入已达到1420亿美元，但2025财政年度的关税收入 只占美国联邦总收入的3.1%。 英国杜伦大学法学院副院长、跨国法教授兼全球政策研究所联合主任杜明则对第一财经记者表示，目前 美国最高法院的裁决方向较难判断，但如果该最高法院判定特朗普政府所谓"对等关税"违法，特朗普政 府应当不会公开挑战判决。 特朗普警告关税损失将使政府陷入"财政崩溃" 5月，特朗普政府在国际贸易法院的第一轮辩论中败诉，法官彼时裁定，美国总统没有根据1977年《国 际经济紧急状态权力法》（IEEPA） ...

FICC日报 | 2025-08-15 关注"特普会"和中国7月经济数据 市场分析 7月基本面仍有韧性。7月30日政治局会议明确部署下半年经济工作：对于宏观政策基调，会议强调"宏观政策要持 续发力、适时加力。要落实落细更加积极的财政政策和适度宽松的货币政策"，维持"稳中有进"的基调。全球7月的 经济数据仍有韧性：中国7月官方制造业PMI回落至49.3，新订单指数回落至49.4，非制造业保持扩张；中国7月按 美元计出口同比增长7.2%，高于预期，主要受去年低基数和"抢出口"效应支撑。中国7月CPI同比持平，PPI环比降 幅收窄，煤炭、光伏等行业竞争秩序优化减少价格拖累。中国7月新增社融1.16万亿元，人民币贷款减少500亿元， M2-M1剪刀差缩小。美国方面，7月非农数据不及预期，但7月服务业PMI明显改善，"大漂亮"法案或支撑后续消费。 受服务成本飙升推动，美国7月PP环比飙升至0.9%，创下三年来最大涨幅。数据公布后，美股三大股指期货快速走 低，交易员减少了对美联储将在9月降息的押注。展望后续，对等关税2.0生效，需要关注后续需求情况。8月14日， A股全天冲高回落，三大股指集体收跌，今日成交2.31万亿。 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the impact of the recent suspension of tariffs between China and the U.S. on the foreign trade industry, highlighting the uncertainty and adjustments made by businesses in response to changing trade policies [5][11]. Group 1: Tariff Suspension and Its Effects - On August 12, a 90-day suspension of a 24% tariff was announced, while a remaining 10% tariff and an additional 20% tariff on certain products remain in effect, resulting in a total of 30% tariffs on Chinese exports to the U.S. [5][11]. - The initial announcement of "reciprocal tariffs" in April caused significant disruptions in trade, with tariffs on some products exceeding 100%, leading many businesses to halt production [5][11]. Group 2: Changes in Business Operations - August is typically a busy season for foreign trade operators, but this year, many businesses are ending their busy season earlier due to the uncertainty surrounding tariffs [15][19]. - Companies have reported an increase in workload, with some factories experiencing a 20% increase in production to meet urgent orders before the tariff deadline [19][20]. Group 3: Market Dynamics and Trade Behavior - Despite a brief surge in shipping demand, the overall shipping rates did not rise as expected, indicating a cautious approach from both suppliers and buyers [22][24]. - Many Chinese suppliers are opting for smaller, more frequent shipments to manage risks associated with tariffs, reflecting a shift in trade behavior [25][26]. Group 4: Consumer Demand and Product Strategy - There is a noticeable shift in consumer demand towards lower-priced products, as higher tariffs have led to increased prices for goods [26][27]. - Companies are focusing on product innovation and cost reduction strategies to remain competitive, with some exploring new markets outside the U.S. [31][32]. Group 5: Future Outlook and Strategic Adjustments - The uncertainty surrounding tariffs has led companies to adopt a wait-and-see approach, with many choosing to maintain current operations rather than aggressively pursuing new markets [30][32]. - Platforms like TikTok Shop and Temu are expanding in Europe while facing declines in the U.S., indicating a potential shift in market focus for e-commerce businesses [32].