2025.12.11 本文字数：2173，阅读时长大约4分钟 作者 |第一财经 冯迪凡 印度尼西亚与美国达成的贸易协议面临崩溃危险。 据新华社转引外国媒体报道称，美国与印度尼西亚7月达成的贸易协议正面临破裂。印尼方面认为美国 试图在贸易协议中加入"毒丸"条款，侵犯其"经济主权"，美方则认为印尼"背弃"承诺。 据报道，知情人士透露，美国贸易代表杰格里尔认为印度尼西亚正在"反悔"其作出的多项承诺。 上述知情人士称，印尼官员已告知美国贸易代表办公室（USTR），印尼方面无法同意协议中的某些具 有约束力的承诺，他们希望重新表达这些承诺。 新加坡国立大学东亚研究所高级研究员、经济研究主管陈波对第一财经记者表示，东南亚国家多年来已 在合作共赢中获益、实现共同经济发展，因此较为抗拒具有强制性的所谓"对等关税"协议。 美印尼贸易协议面临崩溃风险 7月15日，美国宣布与印尼达成贸易协议。美国承诺将对所有进口的印尼商品征收19%关税，此前印尼 输美产品的关税约为32%。印尼承诺购买价值150亿美元的美国能源、价值45亿美元的美国农产品以及 50架波音飞机。 对于印尼当前直接声称无法履行已达成的协议，且需要重新谈判，前述知情人士补 ...

2025.12. 11 本文字数：2173，阅读时长大约4分钟 作者 | 第一财经 冯迪凡 印度尼西亚与美国达成的贸易协议面临崩溃危险。 据新华社转引外国媒体报道称，美国与印度尼西亚7月达成的贸易协议正面临破裂。 印尼方面认为美 国试图在贸易协议中加入"毒丸"条款，侵犯其"经济主权"，美方则认为印尼"背弃"承诺。 据报道，知情人士透露，美国贸易代表杰格里尔认为印度尼西亚正在"反悔"其作出的多项承诺。 上述知情人士称，印尼官员已告知美国贸易代表办公室（USTR），印尼方面无法同意协议中的某些 具有约束力的承诺，他们希望重新表达这些承诺。 新加坡国立大学东亚研究所高级研究员、经济研究主管陈波对第一财经记者表示，东南亚国家多年来 已在合作共赢中获益、实现共同经济发展，因此较为抗拒具有强制性的所谓"对等关税"协议。 美印尼贸易协议面临崩溃风险 7月15日，美国宣布与印尼达成贸易协议。美国承诺将对所有进口的印尼商品征收19%关税，此前印 尼输美产品的关税约为32%。印尼承诺购买价值150亿美元的美国能源、价值45亿美元的美国农产品 以及50架波音飞机。 据第一财经记者梳理，美方在近期谈判中一直试图在贸易协定中加入类似条 ...

特朗普的这场豪赌，始于他对"不公平贸易"的执念。 2025年1月，特朗普开启第二任期后，迅速将贸易政策与国家安全绑定，推出"公平与对等计划"。 美方宣称，将借征收对等关税之法，着力削减贸易逆差，复兴美国制造业。 特朗普嘴上喊着"美国优先"，声称要扭转贸易不平衡的局面。 2025年4月，特朗普政府推出"对等关税"政策，对华加征关税最高达145%。 还扬言要靠贸易封锁、技术围堵让中国经济倒退25年。 这场被外界视为"押上美国经济未来"的豪赌，瞬间搅乱全球贸易格局。 可当关税大棒真的砸下来，他又真的能如愿吗？ 在他的政策逻辑里，中国是美国贸易逆差的"主要原因"。 只要通过高额关税阻断中国商品进入美国市场，就能逼迫制造业回流。 同时让中国经济失去增长动力。 为了实现这一目标，特朗普政府不惜挑起全面贸易摩擦。 2025年4月2日，美国正式对贸易伙伴设立10%的最低基准关税。 而对华关税更是从最初的34%一路飙升至145%，涵盖了绝大多数中国输美商品。 在特朗普看来，这样的"极限施压"的手段会让中国不堪忍受。 出口受阻会导致企业倒闭、就业流失，经济增长必然大幅放缓，"倒退25年"似乎触手可及。 他甚至在社交媒体上公开表示 ...

Group 1 - The U.S. is expanding the range of products exempt from reciprocal tariffs, particularly in aerospace and pharmaceuticals, while most general plastics and chemical products still incur these tariffs [1][2] - The reciprocal tariff rates range from 10% to 40%, and the U.S. has recently added more food and fertilizer imports to the exemption list due to domestic supply issues [1][2] - The exemption list includes various categories such as minerals, food, fertilizers, crude oil, refined products, pharmaceuticals, and semiconductor materials [1] Group 2 - The largest tariff exemptions come from imports from Canada and Mexico under the USMCA, with additional exemptions provided through various trade agreements [2] - The impact of tariff exemptions on the chemical industry is minimal, as most chemical products are excluded from the exemption lists, but key minerals that are exempt may influence the chemical market indirectly [2][3] - Limited chemical raw materials qualify for exemptions, and many essential chemicals like benzene and toluene still face tariffs despite domestic shortages [3] Group 3 - The reciprocal tariff policy is currently facing legal challenges, which may lead to a reevaluation of the tariff structure in the future [3] - The established exemption lists and trade agreements provide insights into the potential direction of U.S. trade policy [3]

（文章来源：第一财经） 据报道，丰田通商和住友化学等至少9家日企的美国相关公司已向美国国际贸易法院提起诉讼，要求退 还基于美国特朗普政府高关税措施而支付的关税。此举目的是若美国联邦最高法院正在审理的围绕"对 等关税"等措施合法性的诉讼作出违法判决，可获得退税。 ...

新华社纽约12月1日电（记者施春）美国大型连锁超市开市客近日对特朗普政府提起诉讼，要求法院裁 定其所有依据美国《国际紧急经济权力法》征收的所谓"对等关税"均属非法，并寻求将税款"全额退 款"，成为最新一家通过法律途径寻求关税退款的大型企业。 ...

Core Points - The U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Gina Raimondo, linked the reduction of a 50% tariff on EU steel and aluminum products to the EU's willingness to relax regulations on technology companies [1] - The European Commission's Vice President, Margrethe Vestager, stated that the EU's digital regulatory rules are non-negotiable, aimed at ensuring market fairness, protecting consumer rights, and securing Europe's digital future [1] - The linkage of steel and aluminum tariffs to tech regulation complicates the EU's efforts to obtain tariff exemptions from the U.S. [1] Group 1 - The U.S. has accused the EU of having a trade surplus and imposing barriers on U.S. trade, with digital regulations being viewed as non-tariff trade barriers [1] - Despite threats from the U.S., the EU continues to advance its digital antitrust regulations, recently imposing fines of €500 million on Apple and €200 million on Meta [1]

Core Points - The trade negotiations between the US and EU are ongoing despite a July agreement, with both sides expressing dissatisfaction with the pace of implementation [1][2] - The US is pushing for the EU to eliminate certain regulations viewed as non-tariff barriers, while the EU remains firm on its digital laws [2][5] - The EU is seeking modifications to the July agreement to create a more balanced trade relationship, facing scrutiny from the European Parliament [5][6] Group 1: Trade Negotiations - The recent high-level meeting in Brussels involved US Commerce Secretary and Trade Representative discussing trade issues with EU officials [1] - The US plans to impose a 15% tariff on most EU goods, while the EU has promised to eliminate tariffs on US industrial products [2] - The EU is requesting exemptions for sensitive products, including pasta, cheese, and wine, from US tariffs [4][7] Group 2: Regulatory Pressures - The US is urging the EU to revise its digital and climate regulations, which are perceived as trade barriers [2][5] - The EU is maintaining a unified front in negotiations, avoiding individual country demands that could lead to division [6] - There is a lack of consensus within the EU regarding the trade agreement, with varying opinions among member states [6][7]

Group 1 - The article discusses President Trump's ongoing efforts to maintain his tariff policies, particularly the "reciprocal tariffs" and the legal challenges surrounding them [1][2] - The White House has recently adjusted the scope of the "reciprocal tariffs," excluding various agricultural products from the additional tariff list, effective from November 13 [1] - Trump has proposed the possibility of issuing $2,000 checks to many Americans as a form of tariff "dividend," contingent upon Congressional approval [1] Group 2 - The Trump administration imposed tariffs on products from Canada, Mexico, and China under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), leading to legal challenges from affected U.S. businesses and states [2] - A previous court ruling stated that Trump lacked the authority to impose tariffs on multiple countries under IEEPA, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court [2] - The outcome of the Supreme Court's decision is expected to have significant implications for international trade and U.S. fiscal policy, potentially requiring the government to refund over $88 billion in tariffs if the ruling is unfavorable [2] Group 3 - The article outlines alternative legal frameworks, such as Sections 301 and 122 of the Trade Act, which could allow the administration to impose tariffs if the current policies are overturned [3][4] - Section 301 permits investigations into unfair trade practices and suggests unilateral sanctions, while Section 122 allows for tariffs up to 15% for a maximum of 150 days [4] - Despite these alternatives, they may face legal challenges and have limitations in terms of implementation speed and scope [4] Group 4 - The National Economic Council Director indicated that if the Supreme Court rules against the Trump administration, the government may resort to using Sections 301 or 122 to reimpose tariffs [5] - The administration is also utilizing Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to impose tariffs on metals and automobiles, which has drawn criticism from U.S. trade partners [5] - There are concerns that if IEEPA tariffs are deemed unconstitutional, Section 232 may become the fallback plan for the administration, affecting a significant portion of the manufacturing sector [5]

Core Points - The White House is gradually changing its tariff strategy in response to high domestic inflation and uncertainties following a Supreme Court tariff hearing [1] - The Trump administration is preparing a backup plan to impose tariffs unilaterally under Sections 301 and 122 of the Trade Act if "reciprocal tariffs" are overturned [1][3] - The Supreme Court is currently hearing lawsuits led by small importers and Democratic states, challenging the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [3] Group 1 - The Trade Act Section 301 allows investigations into "unreasonable or unjust trade practices" and has been used over 130 times historically, with 35 investigations initiated post-1995 [1] - Section 122 of the Trade Act permits the President to impose tariffs of up to 15% for a maximum of 150 days [3] - The Department of Commerce has initiated new investigations under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, targeting industries such as metals and automobiles, with potential implications for a wide range of manufacturing sectors [3] Group 2 - The White House has recently adjusted the scope of "reciprocal tariffs," excluding various agricultural products such as coffee, bananas, and beef from additional tariffs [4] - The updated tariff exemptions and potential adjustments for "allied partners" have been released [4] - The changes took effect starting November 13 [5]