Core Insights - The Trump administration's implementation of a reciprocal tariff policy resulted in additional tariffs ranging from 10% to 49% on most imported goods, which was later adjusted to a 10% rate due to market volatility [1][2] - The tariff policy led to a significant increase in tariff revenue, with April's revenue reaching $17.43 billion, a year-on-year increase of 130%, and May's revenue surpassing $24 billion, a 270% increase, setting historical records [2] - Despite the increase in tariffs, inflation rates remained stable, with the core CPI showing a consistent year-on-year increase of around 2.8% since March, and the overall CPI rising only 2.4% in May [4] Tariff Revenue Analysis - Tariff revenue for June was projected to exceed $28 billion, indicating a continuous record-breaking trend over three months [2] - The 10% tariff rate appears to balance corporate profits while maintaining product supply in the U.S. market, thus enhancing tariff revenue [2] Inflation and Price Stability - The anticipated inflation surge did not materialize, with May's major goods showing only a 0.3% year-on-year price increase, and some goods, like televisions and smartphones, experiencing price declines of 9.8% and 14.3%, respectively [4][6] - The automotive sector, despite facing a 25% tariff, saw a minimal price increase of only 0.4% [4] Future Implications - U.S. importers have been stockpiling low-tariff goods prior to the policy implementation, which has temporarily masked the impact of the tariff increases on prices [6] - The delayed effect of price transmission through the supply chain suggests that the full impact of tariffs may not be felt until later, with July being a critical month [6] - Importers are currently absorbing some of the tariff costs, but this situation is unsustainable in the long term, especially if tariffs are further increased [6] - Predictions indicate that the average effective tariff rate may rise to 15% in the coming months, with core CPI expected to increase to between 3% and 3.5% by the end of 2025, suggesting potential future price pressures on consumers [6]

Core Viewpoint - The recent G7 tax agreement appears to be a compromise between the US and its allies, but it reveals the US's strategic maneuvering to gain long-term benefits while temporarily conceding to its allies [1][3]. Group 1: Tax Agreement Details - The G7 agreement allows US tech giants to be exempt from the OECD's global minimum corporate tax rules, preventing them from paying back taxes in overseas markets [1][3]. - In exchange, the US Congress must repeal Section 899 of the US Competition Act, which authorizes the government to impose retaliatory tariffs on countries that discriminate against US companies [1][3]. Group 2: Strategic Implications - The agreement is seen as a tactical retreat by the US to secure strategic cooperation from allies in economic containment against China [3][4]. - The negotiations were dominated by the US, which threatened to initiate a "301 investigation" against the EU's digital tax and impose tariffs on European goods, leading to swift concessions from European leaders [3][4]. Group 3: European Challenges - Europe faces a triple dilemma: ceding fiscal sovereignty, being bound by US policies towards China, and internal divisions among member states regarding their stance on China [4][6]. - The new tax agreement indirectly acknowledges the "super-national treatment" of US companies, resulting in significant annual tax losses for the EU [4][6]. Group 4: China's Response - China has implemented export controls on critical metals like gallium and germanium, which are essential for Western countries, highlighting its leverage in the trade conflict [9][11]. - The Chinese government is also working to divide the US-EU alliance by approving significant orders from Airbus while halting purchases from Boeing, demonstrating the potential costs of decoupling from China [9][11]. Group 5: Future Considerations - The sustainability of US concessions is uncertain, as historical patterns suggest that the US may revert to aggressive trade tactics if allies hesitate in their pressure on China [11]. - The potential for European strategic autonomy is being tested, with leaders like Macron advocating for independence from major powers, which could pose long-term risks for US influence [11].

Fiscal Impact - The new tariff policy has shown immediate revenue effects, with the U.S. Treasury collecting $17.43 billion in tariffs in the first month and $24 billion in May, a year-on-year increase of 270% [3] - By June 26, the cumulative tariff revenue reached $27.26 billion, with expectations to surpass $28 billion by the end of the month, indicating a significant increase in tax base without triggering trade shrinkage risks [3] Price Stability - Despite soaring tariff revenues, consumer prices have remained stable, with the core CPI growth staying below 3% for three consecutive months since March, and an overall CPI increase of only 2.4% in May [5] - The price of major consumer goods rose by just 0.3% in May, with significant price drops in televisions and smartphones, and even the automotive sector, which faced a 25% tariff, saw a price increase limited to 0.4% [5][7] Supply Chain Dynamics - Importers engaged in preemptive purchasing before the tariff implementation, creating a buffer of inventory that delayed price increases for several months [7] - The lag in supply chain adjustments means that the current consumer market reflects pre-tariff cost structures, with potential price impacts expected to manifest in the third quarter [7] Long-term Concerns - As inventory depletes, the ability of importers to absorb tariff costs will be tested, leading to inevitable cost pass-through to consumers [9] - Economic institutions are cautious about the long-term effects of the tariff policy, with predictions that the average effective tariff rate could rise to the 15% range by the end of the year, potentially pushing core CPI to 3% to 3.5% [9] Global Trade Implications - The U.S.-led tariff strategy is reshaping international trade dynamics, with emerging market economies facing challenges and multinational corporations adopting more conservative investment strategies [11] - The eventual adjustment of global supply chains and the pressure on importers' profit margins may lead U.S. consumers to confront the true costs of the tariff policy [11]

Group 1: Stablecoin Legislation and Market Impact - Hong Kong's Stablecoin Regulation officially legislated, effective August 2025, marking the first clear regulatory framework for stablecoins, providing institutional support for the digital financial ecosystem [1] - The initial market reaction indicates a concentration of funds on compliant technology service providers, reflecting a "regulatory-driven, technology realization" phenomenon [1] - Investors should focus on companies in Hong Kong with compliance application capabilities, technical reserves, and regulatory experience, as these firms will likely enter the regulatory "whitelist" and gain long-term advantages [1] - The essence of stablecoins lies not in their value but in their ability to reconstruct the "USD liquidity path," bypassing SWIFT and traditional banking systems, transforming USD into on-chain circulating assets [1] - Companies like Hengsheng Electronics, Tianyang Technology, and Sifang Chuangxin, while not issuers, are expected to become the "foundation" of the on-chain financial system, providing core functions such as payment channels, identity verification, and custody auditing, leading to valuation leaps [1] Group 2: Ant Group's Strategy in Stablecoin Ecosystem - Ant Group's international and digital technology arms are targeting stablecoin license applications from both cross-border fund operations and underlying technology infrastructure perspectives, showcasing a dual approach in the global stablecoin ecosystem [2] - Ant International processes over $1 trillion annually in cross-border transactions, with $300 billion already operating through blockchain technology; successful conversion to stablecoin clearing paths could support explosive growth in practical scenarios [2] - Ant Digital Technology is focusing on building the necessary underlying service capabilities for future stablecoin circulation through technology sandboxes and RWA (Real World Asset tokenization) [2] - The Hong Kong Stablecoin Regulation sets high regulatory standards, including a minimum capital requirement of HKD 25 million and 100% reserve custody, which Ant has already navigated through regulatory sandbox tests [2] - Ant's established payment network and international cooperation position it favorably to embed stablecoins into core scenarios such as cross-border e-commerce, overseas remittances, and international fund pool management [3] Group 3: Industrial Metals Trading Opportunities - In April 2025, Trump's proposed reciprocal tariff policy triggered a panic sell-off in industrial metals; however, a subsequent 90-day implementation delay released "negotiation signals," leading to a rebound in the non-ferrous sector, which has returned to pre-tariff levels [3] - Despite recent signs of a temporary easing in US-China trade relations, the 24% reciprocal tariff remains in place, and with strong inflation/employment data from Europe and the US, the difficulty of mid-term favorable outcomes increases [3] Group 4: Automotive Industry and Recall Issues - On June 13, 2025, Mercedes-Benz announced three recall notices in one day, involving 16,100 vehicles across multiple models, including EQC, A-Class, CLA, GLA, C-Class, GLC SUV, S-Class, and EQE [4] - In a competitive landscape for smart electric vehicles, user reputation and product safety are critical for repeat purchases, and frequent recalls significantly diminish brand premium [4] - BMS system errors may expose integration and testing inadequacies between Mercedes-Benz and partners like CATL, highlighting the need for investors to focus on suppliers with advantages in system stability and safety design [5] Group 5: Internet Television Subscription Regulations - In mid-June 2025, China's National Radio and Television Administration initiated a special governance on automatic renewal of internet television subscriptions, addressing consumer pain points such as "deduction without reminder" and "complex cancellation" [6] - The previous model of "default renewal + hidden cancellation" was a primary monetization method for internet TV platforms, with some OTT platforms relying on "renewal forgetfulness" to maintain user retention [6] - New regulations require user "active consent + advance reminder," likely leading to a significant decline in renewal rates, particularly affecting marginal paying users and inactive user groups [6] - Smaller OTT integrators and content providers may exit due to cost pressures, while platforms with compliance capabilities and mature user operation systems (e.g., Mango TV, CCTV Video, Aurora TV) are better positioned to adapt [6]

[Table_Main] 证券研究报告 | 宏观点评 宏观专题 证券分析师 张浩 资格编号：S0120524070001 邮箱：zhanghao3＠tebon.com.cn 研究助理 相关研究 2025 年 06 月 15 日 一文读懂美国的《国家紧急状态法》 宏观 ABC 系列之七 [Table_Summary] 投资要点： 请务必阅读正文之后的信息披露和法律声明 2025 年特朗普政府利用 NEA 与 IEEPA 组合，以国家安全和贸易逆差为由，绕 过国会批准程序单方面宣布紧急状态，并对中国、加拿大、墨西哥及其他主要贸易 伙伴征收普遍高额关税。这一行动迅速遭遇法律挑战，美国国际贸易法庭（CIT） 裁定其违宪并颁布禁令，但随后被联邦巡回上诉法院暂时中止执行。本文将全面解 析美国的《国家紧急状态法》，从而了解特朗普是如何通过 NEA 与 IEEPA 组合， 绕开国会实行所谓的"对等关税"政策。 NEA 与 IEEPA：美国总统紧急权力的制度化与扩张。20 世纪 70 年代，美国国会 为防止总统滥用紧急状态权力，通过了《国家紧急状态法》（NEA），设立程序性限 制并规定紧急状态自动失效机制，试图加强国会监督。然 ...

Group 1 - The fifth round of US-Japan tariff negotiations has reached a deadlock due to significant disagreements among key US representatives, including Treasury Secretary Yellen, Commerce Secretary Raimondo, and Trade Representative Tai, leading to a temporary pause in talks [1][3] - Japan is attempting to sacrifice its interests with China to appease the US, proposing measures to limit Chinese influence in exchange for tariff concessions from the US [3][10] - Japan's proposal includes establishing partnerships with the US in critical mineral sectors like rare earths, despite its heavy reliance on Chinese imports, which could negatively impact its own industries [4][5] Group 2 - Japan's commitment to purchase more US semiconductor products and assist in semiconductor manufacturing aims to curb China's semiconductor industry growth, but it risks straining Japan's own trade relations with China [7] - Japan plans to increase imports of US liquefied natural gas to fill the market gap left by reduced Chinese imports, which may lead to higher costs and instability in energy supply [7] - The collaboration with the US on building icebreakers may weaken Japan's shipbuilding industry, diverting resources and reducing competitiveness in other ship types [8] Group 3 - Japan's strategy to use measures against China as leverage in tariff negotiations reflects a long-standing pro-US diplomatic stance, which may backfire economically and politically [9][10] - China's response to Japan's actions could include tightening export policies on rare earths and reassessing trade partnerships, potentially leading to economic repercussions for Japan [12] - The internal divisions within the US government regarding tariff policies add uncertainty to the negotiations, making it unclear whether Japan's concessions will lead to the desired tariff reductions [12]

另一方面，对于日方的要求，美方的态度并不明确。 美方谈判主要人员为美财长贝森特、商务部长卢特尼克和贸易代表格里尔，不过，新加坡《联合早报》 援引《日本经济新闻》6日的报道称，有消息人士透露，这三人在与日方的谈判中一度发生内讧。 消息人士说："在谈判某一刻，三位内阁官员停下与日方的讨论，在对手面前开始争辩。"还有消息称这 三人意在抢功，并猜测他们试图讨好美国总统特朗普，三人有时也会分别向日方施压要求让步。 分析称，贝森特被认为是对市场观点敏感的温和派，而卢特尼克的贸易立场则被视为强硬派，相比之 下，格里尔的角色似乎被淡化。 中新网6月9日电 综合外媒报道，近日，美国和日本的代表团在美国华盛顿就关税问题展开谈判，日本 媒体报道称，谈判过程中美国官员发生内讧，导致日方人员不明就里，最终双方未能达成一致，日本首 相石破茂的访美行程也因此推迟。 日方难以判断美方意图 报道称，这样的场景，让日方难以判断特朗普政府的真实意图。 当地时间5日，日本经济再生大臣赤泽亮正率日方代表团到华盛顿与美方展开新一轮关税谈判，这已经 是双方的第五轮谈判。 美国总统特朗普上台后实施的所谓"对等关税"政策，日本也在其中。此外，特朗普6月初签署 ...

美国总统特朗普可能要总和他作对的民主党铁票仓加州施加"财政制裁"，数千亿美元的研究资金、基建 项目和教育投资可能受到冲击。 美东时间6月6日周五，据美媒报道，多名消息人士透露，特朗普政府正准备大规模撤销联邦政府给予加 州的资金支持，可能最早本周五开始行动。各政府机构已被要求开始识别，哪些联邦政府拨款的项目可 以扣留拨发给加州的资金。 Issa表示，他向这些焦虑的大学代表传达的信息很明确：提供具体的拨款项目细节和理由，他就会支 持，"我不会为不削减（开支）而游说"。 在财政施压的同时，加州与特朗普政府的法庭对抗也在升级。据新华社报道，加州是美国首个就关税问 题起诉特朗普政府的州，此前以州政府和州长纽森的名义，于4月16日向加州北区联邦地区法院提起诉 讼，指控联邦政府依据《国际紧急经济权力法》实施所谓"对等关税"政策违法，并称此举损害各州、消 费者和企业的广泛利益。 加州高铁项目成"靶子" 在传出加州面临特朗普政府"财政制裁"的消息前，最近特朗普和加州的关系已经越来越剑拔弩张。 上月，因为一名跨性别运动员参加了一场体育赛事，特朗普就威胁要停止对加州的联邦政府资助。加州 链接洛杉矶与旧金山的高铁项目近来一再成为"靶 ...

特朗普的关税大战，坚持到现在依旧没有见到太多的收效，眼瞅着中国啃不动，特朗普又开始迫其他国 家交作业。 6月3日，美国总统特朗普在社交媒体发文，再次推销自己的对等关税政策，并且做出了解释，把自己伪 装成一个受害者称，其他国家对美国征收高额关税，却不允许美国反击，这么下来，美国的经济就没有 生存的机会了。与此同时，路透社公布了一则致美国谈判伙伴的信函，告诫这些国家目前美国政府已经 没有耐心了，要求各国代表在6月4日本周三之前必须给出最好的谈判报价。 为了配合特朗普的威胁，美国商务部长将第一刀砍向了印度，指出印度的做法激怒了美国，指责印度经 常从俄罗斯出购买军事武器，还指责印度加入了金砖国家，更是跟着金砖国家一起转向摆脱美元霸权 尤其是在美国的对等关税搬出之前，印度就率先赶往美国愿意妥协，虽然印度方面做出了极大的让步， 但是美国还是一步不让，这也导致谈判被搁置了下去，如今美国旧事重提逼迫印度妥协，按照印度以往 的操作手段，在美国的胡萝卜加大棒的威胁下，用不了多久就软了会向美国妥协。继续做他的骑墙派。 美商务部长霍华德·卢特尼克表示，这些问题特朗普已经给摆在了桌前要求印度政府解决，还特地强调 预计在不久的将来，印度 ...

Group 1: Trade Policy Uncertainty - The Trump administration's potential increase of tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from 25% to 50% raises trade policy uncertainty [1][8] - The Oxford Economics economist Edward Allenby indicates that the courts are playing a larger role in determining tariff levels, which may further exacerbate trade policy uncertainty [1] Group 2: US-UK Economic Prosperity Agreement - The US and UK reached a non-legally binding "Economic Prosperity Agreement" (EPD) on May 8, which has raised concerns among international law experts regarding its terminology [3] - The EPD does not eliminate reciprocal tariffs but lowers tariffs on certain industries such as automobiles, steel, aluminum, and pharmaceuticals [3] Group 3: US-China Trade Negotiations - A joint statement from the US and China on May 12 outlines mutual commitments to cancel and modify tariffs, with the US agreeing to eliminate 91% of tariffs on Chinese goods [4] - China will also suspend or cancel non-tariff retaliatory measures against US goods [4] Group 4: Impact of Legal Challenges - The US International Trade Court ruled that Trump overstepped his authority regarding global tariffs, but the appeals court temporarily stayed this ruling, allowing tariffs to remain in effect [7] - The ongoing legal battles between the Trump administration and US federal courts are influencing the progress of international negotiations [5][7] Group 5: Global Trade Dynamics - Countries like Japan, India, and South Korea are reassessing their negotiation strategies with the US following the suspension of tariffs on China [6] - India's plan to impose retaliatory tariffs on US goods worth $1.91 billion indicates a shift in its trade stance under Prime Minister Modi [6]