文 ： 华创证券研究所副所长 、首席宏观分析师 张瑜（执业证号：S0360518090001） 联系人：夏雪 （微信 SuperSummerSnow） 核心观点 5 月 28 日，美国国际贸易法庭（ CIT ）裁决特朗普特朗普依据《国际紧急经济权力法》（ IEEPA ）对多个国家征收的全面关税是越权行为，要求特朗普政 府在 10 天内停止加征相关关税，引发市场关注。对于市场关注的几个焦点，我们一一拆解： 1 ） CIT 的裁决影响的是所有依据 IEEPA 条款加征的关税 ，包括对中国 20% 芬太尼关税、对墨西哥和加拿大 25% 的非法移民和芬太尼关税、以及对等关 税，不受影响的是依据 232 条款加征的关键行业税，目前生效的有汽车和零部件 25% 、钢铝 25% 。 2 ）目前特朗普加征的关税仍然有效 。因为特朗普在 CIT 裁决后立即提起上诉，联邦巡回上诉法院已经批准临时暂缓令，恢复关税执行至 6 月 9 号。 3 ）后续关注点是 6 月 9 号之后联邦巡回上诉法院是否会批准长期暂缓令（暂缓执行 CIT 的关税禁令直至上诉结束） ， 如果不批准，则 IEEPA 关税全部暂 停执行，如果批准，则对现行关税没 ...

Summary of Key Points from the Conference Call Industry or Company Involved - The discussion primarily revolves around the **U.S.-China trade relations** and the **tariff policies** implemented by the Trump administration. Core Points and Arguments 1. **Complex U.S.-China Trade Negotiations**: The trade negotiations between the U.S. and China are characterized by fundamental disagreements on issues such as rare earth exports and chip restrictions, indicating a long-term tension in trade relations [1][3][6] 2. **Judicial Challenges to Tariff Policies**: Trump's tariff policies face multiple judicial challenges, with conflicting rulings from international trade courts and circuit courts reflecting deep divisions within the U.S. regarding these policies [1][4][8] 3. **Impact of Tariffs on Specific Industries**: The U.S. plans to impose high tariffs on pharmaceuticals, particularly targeting India and China, which is expected to significantly impact related chemical companies [1][10] 4. **Trump's B Plan**: In response to judicial challenges, Trump has developed a "Plan B" to ensure the continuation of high tariff policies by leveraging existing legal provisions and mobilizing congressional support [1][27][33] 5. **Significance of the Supreme Court**: The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to play a decisive role in the future of tariff policies, with the potential for significant implications depending on its rulings [18][20][24] 6. **Tariff Structure**: Trump's tariff policy includes three layers: national-level tariffs, product-specific tariffs, and special tariffs targeting specific countries like China, Canada, and Mexico [9][31] 7. **Judicial Outcomes and Their Implications**: If the Washington court upholds the New York court's ruling, it could lead to the cancellation of several tariffs, significantly affecting U.S.-China trade dynamics [14][16][26] 8. **Internal Opposition to Tariff Policies**: There is notable internal opposition within the U.S. government and among businesses against Trump's tariff policies, yet this has not deterred his administration from pursuing these strategies [2][6][36] 9. **Long-term Economic Strategy**: Trump believes that increasing tariffs will attract foreign investment into U.S. manufacturing, leading to long-term economic growth despite short-term pain [37] Other Important but Possibly Overlooked Content 1. **Trade Volume with Key Countries**: In 2024, exports from China, Canada, and Mexico to the U.S. totaled $1.3 trillion, accounting for 42% of total U.S. imports, highlighting their significant role in U.S. trade [11] 2. **Court Rulings and Their Legal Basis**: The New York court ruled against Trump's tariffs based on the "major question doctrine," indicating that such significant economic decisions require congressional authorization [23][34] 3. **Future Legislative Movements**: Republican lawmakers are considering new legislation to authorize the president to take action on trade deficits, which could further entrench Trump's tariff policies [35]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. International Trade Court ruled against President Trump's tariff policy, stating that he overstepped his authority by imposing tariffs on countries with trade surpluses with the U.S. This ruling challenges the legality of the tariffs and emphasizes the constitutional power of Congress in regulating trade [1][2][3]. Group 1: Legal Challenge and Court Ruling - The U.S. International Trade Court's ruling on May 28, 2023, blocked Trump's tariff policy, asserting that the President does not have the authority to impose broad tariffs without Congressional approval [2][3]. - The lawsuit was initiated by a coalition of 12 states, arguing that Trump's tariff policy was an unlawful exercise of power [2]. - The court's decision undermines Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as a legal basis for imposing tariffs, which could lead to the cancellation of tariffs imposed under this act [2][3]. Group 2: Implications for Trade Policy - The ruling is expected to significantly impact the Trump administration's trade agenda, potentially limiting its ability to use tariffs as a tool for trade protectionism [3][6]. - The decision may embolden other countries in their negotiations with the U.S., as it strengthens their position against U.S. trade pressures [3][9]. - The ruling could lead to a reassessment of U.S. trade policies, as domestic pressures from affected industries and political divisions grow [9][10]. Group 3: Market Reactions - Following the court's decision, there was a notable market reaction, with the S&P 500 and Nasdaq futures rising over 1%, indicating optimism regarding a potential easing of trade tensions [7][8]. - The ruling is likely to influence sectors such as technology and industrials, which may see gains, while defense and domestic steel industries could experience pullbacks [8]. - The overall market sentiment reflects a belief that the tariff policies may become more moderate in the future, despite ongoing uncertainties [9].