Core Viewpoint - Mexico plans to increase import tariffs on approximately 1,400 products, including automobiles, toys, steel, textiles, and plastic products, to a rate of 10%-50% for countries that have not signed free trade agreements with Mexico, including China [1] Group 1 - The proposed tariff increase aligns with the U.S.'s long-standing strategy to contain China and may facilitate future trade negotiations between Mexico and its North American partners [1] - The Chinese government expresses concern over Mexico's unilateral tariff actions, emphasizing the need for countries to communicate and coordinate to maintain free trade and multilateralism [1][2] - Any unilateral tariff measures by Mexico, even within the framework of WTO rules, are viewed as a concession to unilateral bullying and could harm the interests of relevant trade partners, including China [1] Group 2 - The Chinese government advocates for resolving trade differences through equal dialogue and negotiation, opposing any form of unilateralism, protectionism, and discriminatory measures [2] - China will take necessary measures based on actual circumstances to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests [2]

央广网北京9月10日消息（记者马喆）据中央广播电视总台中国之声《新闻和报纸摘要》报道，国 务院总理李强昨天（9日）在北京人民大会堂同来华进行正式访问的葡萄牙总理蒙特内格罗举行会谈。 吴政隆参加上述活动。 蒙特内格罗表示，葡中传统友好，葡政府愿同中方密切各级别对话交流，深化贸易、农业、海洋、 文化、体育等领域合作，打造科技创新、数字经济、绿色能源、旅游合作新亮点。葡方欢迎中国企业赴 葡投资兴业，希与中方拓展三方合作。葡方愿同中方加强在联合国等多边平台的沟通协调，维护开放公 平的自由贸易。葡方支持欧中加强对话合作，愿为此发挥建设性作用。 会谈前，李强在北京人民大会堂北大厅为蒙特内格罗举行欢迎仪式。 李强表示，中葡建交以来，双方始终相互信任、彼此尊重、互帮互助，推动双边关系健康稳定发 展。今年适逢中葡建立全面战略伙伴关系20周年，两国关系与合作发展迎来新的契机。习近平主席同总 理先生举行会晤，就进一步巩固深化中葡关系达成重要共识。中方愿同葡方密切高层交往，增进政治互 信，推动各领域合作不断走深走实，为两国人民带来更多福祉。 李强指出，中方愿同葡方加强发展战略对接，继续高质量共建"一带一路"，推动双边贸易优化平衡 发 ...

Core Viewpoint - The upcoming signing of the China-ASEAN Free Trade Area (CAFTA) 3.0 upgrade protocol is expected to create new opportunities for economic cooperation between China and ASEAN, particularly in digital and green economies [1][3]. Group 1: Economic Cooperation - The 22nd China-ASEAN Expo will release a blue paper promoting new opportunities within the CAFTA framework [1]. - The CAFTA 3.0 version includes nine new chapters focusing on digital economy, green economy, supply chain connectivity, and support for small and medium enterprises, which will enhance cooperation and benefit bilateral enterprises and citizens [3][4]. - The expo will host a dialogue on economic cooperation, emphasizing financial and digital economy collaboration, with high-level officials and scholars participating to discuss mutually beneficial strategies for the implementation of CAFTA 3.0 [3]. Group 2: Regional Integration - The completion of CAFTA 3.0 negotiations is significant for promoting regional economic integration and protecting free trade amidst global economic challenges, such as unilateral tariffs imposed by the U.S. [3]. - The expo has played an irreplaceable role in the evolution of the CAFTA from version 1.0 to 2.0, and now towards 3.0, establishing a unique "Nanning Channel" for cultural exchange and open economic development [4].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights the impact of U.S. tariffs on Lamborghini's sales, with CEO Stephan Winkelmann noting that some American customers are delaying purchases due to uncertainty surrounding the final tariff rates [2][3] - Lamborghini has a significant backlog of orders, allowing the company to withstand some pressure from tariffs, but the tariffs have still caused notable disruptions [2][4] - The company is part of the Audi Group under Volkswagen, and it is projected that Lamborghini's revenue will exceed €3 billion (approximately $3.5 billion) in the 2024 fiscal year, reflecting a 16% year-on-year growth [4] Group 2 - Lamborghini's customer base is diversifying, with the average age of owners dropping to below 45 years, and in Asia, the average age is around 30 [5] - The average Lamborghini owner possesses five cars, while owners of the high-end model Revuelto average ten cars [5] - Winkelmann expresses confidence in the judgment of wealthy customers, indicating that their financial success is not coincidental and they understand the implications of their purchasing decisions [6]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles revolves around President Trump's threats to impose additional tariffs and export restrictions on countries implementing digital taxes, particularly targeting the UK and EU [1][3] - Trump's strong stance against digital taxes is not new, as he has long expressed dissatisfaction with EU regulations affecting American tech giants [1][3] - The EU has responded by asserting its sovereign right to regulate economic activities within its territory, defending the Digital Services Act as applicable to all platforms operating in the EU [3] Group 2 - The EU has made significant concessions in recent trade negotiations with the US, agreeing to eliminate tariffs on all US industrial goods and commit to purchasing $750 billion in US energy over three years [5] - The agreement has faced criticism within Europe, with some media labeling it a "humiliating agreement" and expressing dissatisfaction among EU member states [5][7] - EU Commission President von der Leyen defended the agreement, claiming it is a strong deal despite criticisms, and emphasized the need to avoid a trade war with the US [7] Group 3 - France's recent shift in attitude towards China indicates a willingness to strengthen economic ties, with a focus on specific sectors and joint ventures [9] - The Chinese ambassador to France highlighted the mutual benefits of free trade and the importance of global markets, noting that Europe has a higher dependency on exports compared to China [11] - The EU faces a dilemma in balancing its significant trade relationship with the US while also needing to rethink its economic model to reduce reliance on major tech companies [13][15] Group 4 - The potential for US sanctions against EU officials implementing the Digital Services Act has awakened concerns among pro-US factions in Europe [17] - The evolving global trade landscape suggests that Europe is beginning to reassess its position and strategy in light of these developments [17]

Group 1: Historical Context of Tariffs - Tariffs have a long history, dating back to ancient civilizations, where they were used to generate revenue and regulate trade [2][3] - During the mercantilist period (16th to 18th centuries), high tariffs were implemented to maximize exports and minimize imports, with average tariffs in England reaching 45-55% [4][5] - The classical economists, such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo, argued for lower tariffs and free trade, suggesting that it would benefit all nations involved [5][6] Group 2: Tariff Policies in the 18th and 19th Centuries - In the 18th and 19th centuries, tariff policies varied significantly across countries, with the U.S. initially using tariffs as a revenue source, later increasing them to protect emerging industries [7][9] - The U.K. maintained high tariffs until the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846, marking a shift towards free trade [8][9] - The U.S. and Germany adopted high tariffs to protect their industries, leading to faster industrial growth compared to the U.K. [10][9] Group 3: Impact of Tariffs on Global Trade - The imposition of tariffs in the early 20th century, particularly during the Great Depression, led to a significant decline in international trade, exemplified by the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act [12] - Post-World War II, the establishment of GATT aimed to reduce tariffs and promote free trade, resulting in a decrease in average tariffs from 22% in 1947 to below 5% by 1994 [13][14] Group 4: Modern Tariff Trends and Conflicts - In the 21st century, tariffs have resurfaced as a tool for economic policy, with the U.S. under Trump increasing tariffs on imports, particularly from China, leading to retaliatory measures [16][15] - The ongoing trade disputes highlight the tension between protecting domestic industries and the benefits of free trade, with economists warning that high tariffs can lead to increased prices and economic inefficiencies [16][17]

Core Viewpoint - The 25th China International Investment and Trade Fair will be held soon, with the UK as the guest country, highlighting the importance of Sino-British economic and trade cooperation as a stabilizing force in their relationship [1][3]. Group 1: Economic and Trade Cooperation Characteristics - The economic and trade cooperation between China and the UK is characterized by its substantial nature, with trade and service exchanges expected to exceed $130 billion in 2024, averaging $360 million daily [3][4]. - The cooperation is extensive, covering a wide range of industries including machinery, electronics, new energy vehicles, education, insurance, finance, and pharmaceuticals [3][4]. - The cooperation is dynamic, with active participation from the UK in various Chinese trade fairs and a significant number of UK cities represented at the upcoming fair, indicating a robust partnership [4].

Group 1 - The 25th China International Investment and Trade Fair will be held from September 8 to 11 in Xiamen, Fujian Province, with the theme "Join Hands with China, Invest in the Future," and the UK as the guest country [1] - The UK is China's second-largest direct investment destination in Europe and the third-largest source of foreign investment from Europe, highlighting the importance of trade and investment cooperation between China and the UK [1][2] - In 2024, trade in goods and services between China and the UK is expected to exceed $130 billion, equating to approximately $360 million in daily trade [1] Group 2 - The trade and investment cooperation between China and the UK is characterized by its "real," "broad," and "active" nature, with significant mutual investments and a wide range of industries involved [2] - The UK has established over 13,000 enterprises in China, with cumulative actual investment exceeding $35 billion as of July 2025 [1] - Both countries are committed to free trade and support the multilateral trading system, with promising cooperation prospects in areas such as trade investment, clean energy, and financial services [2]

Core Viewpoint - Recent calls by Trump for China to increase soybean imports from the U.S. highlight the potential mutual benefits, yet there has been no response from China [1] Group 1: Historical Context of U.S.-China Soybean Trade - In 2016, China imported 36 million tons of soybeans from the U.S., accounting for 42% of total U.S. soybean exports [3] - The imposition of tariffs by the Trump administration in 2018 led to a significant decline in U.S. soybean exports to China, dropping to 16.64 million tons in the following year, a decrease of over 50% [3] - By 2023, U.S. soybean inventories reached a record high of 1.5 billion bushels, and soybean futures prices fell by 28% compared to 2018 [3] Group 2: Current Trade Dynamics and Policies - Trump has expressed willingness to negotiate lower soybean tariffs with China, emphasizing the simplicity of the trade relationship [5] - China's stance is based on principles of trade equality, asserting that procurement decisions are driven by market forces rather than political pressure [5] - The U.S. agricultural sector has faced significant challenges, with an average annual reduction of $12 billion in soybean export revenue due to lost market share in China [5] Group 3: China's Import Strategy and Market Stability - China is diversifying its soybean import sources, signing long-term agreements with Brazil and increasing imports from Argentina by 70% over five years [6][8] - In 2023, China's total soybean imports reached 108 million tons, fulfilling over 90% of domestic processing needs [8] - The stability of soybean supply has been maintained, with fluctuations in soybean meal prices kept within 5%, supporting the livestock industry [8] Group 4: Future Outlook and Global Trade Implications - The U.S. soybean industry is facing severe challenges, with 12,000 farmers going bankrupt and over 30,000 layoffs in related processing companies [8] - There is potential for cooperation in the soybean trade, as China's stable demand could alleviate U.S. farmers' surplus issues, while U.S. soybeans can enhance China's food supply [8] - The global trade landscape is shifting, with emerging soybean-exporting countries like Brazil and Argentina gaining prominence, emphasizing the need for a commitment to free trade principles [8]

Group 1 - The article discusses the insights of Robert Lighthizer, the former U.S. Trade Representative, on the trade war and its implications for American workers [3][4][10] - Lighthizer criticizes the previous U.S. trade policies that overly emphasized free trade and efficiency, leading to significant job losses in the manufacturing sector [25][29][33] - The article highlights the negative impact of outsourcing manufacturing jobs, which resulted in a loss of 5 million manufacturing jobs in the U.S. from 2000 to 2016 [29][33] Group 2 - Lighthizer argues that the U.S. has been too lenient in trade negotiations with countries like India and China, leading to unfavorable outcomes for American workers [18][19] - The article points out that the U.S. has a long-standing trade deficit, which Lighthizer believes is unsustainable and must be addressed [38][40] - The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the risks of over-reliance on foreign manufacturing, particularly in critical sectors like medical supplies [41][42] Group 3 - The article emphasizes the importance of stable, high-paying jobs for maintaining personal dignity and societal stability [44][46] - Lighthizer advocates for trade policies that prioritize job creation and support for American workers, rather than solely focusing on efficiency [43][45] - The new U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is presented as a model for future trade agreements, aiming to increase domestic job creation in the automotive sector [48][55] Group 4 - The article discusses the historical context of U.S. trade policies and their consequences, including the impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on job losses [50][52] - Lighthizer's perspective suggests that trade can be used as both a tool for economic growth and a means of exerting pressure on other nations [68][70] - The article concludes that internal reforms are necessary for the U.S. to address its economic challenges, rather than relying solely on external trade conflicts [86][90]