央视财经消息，新加坡国务资政李显龙日前在与全国职工总会及工会领袖的对话会中指出， 美国推行的"美国优先"本质上是零和博弈，美国加征关税可能 迅速引发美自身经济衰退，同时波及世界其他地区。 李显龙认为，美国正寻求并推动一个"本质上截然不同的世界"， 其战略核心并非"共赢"，而是"非赢即输" 。"这不仅对新加坡有重大影响，对整个世界都 有重大影响。"作为世界第一大经济体，美国退出国际规则体系将对世界其他国家造成显著冲击。 李显龙还表示，新加坡将继续坚定支持自由贸易、多边主义及世界贸易组织，努力维持全球经济体系正常运转，避免其因美国退出而陷入瘫痪。与此同 时，新加坡政府对于美国关税战影响保持高度关注。 图片来源：每经记者 王嘉琦 摄 据央视新闻，新加坡总理黄循财4月8日表示，他认为 美国当下的关税和贸易政策并非美国所称的"改革"，而是在彻底摒弃自己缔造的体系，他对美国深感 失望 。 特朗普称要征收"对等关税"，但新加坡对美国存在贸易逆差，却依然被美国征收10%的关税。 黄循财还表示，新加坡将寻找其他合作伙伴，通过其他途径保持经济韧性并维持全球多边体系。 美东时间4月16日周三，美国财政部公布国际资本流动报告（TIC ...

迟福林表示，当前，自由贸易是全球最重要的公共产品，仍是引领区域经济一体化发展和经济全球 化的重要动力。中改院与世界自由区组织联合创设世界自由贸易论坛，就是为了发挥智库作用，围绕全 球自由贸易进程开展客观、专业的分析，就自由贸易面临的挑战和机遇展开高层次研讨，增进坚定不移 维护和推进自由贸易进程的共识与合力。 据介绍，首届世界自由贸易论坛致力于积极倡导维护、促进、拓展和繁荣全球自由贸易，覆盖发达 经济体与新兴市场。论坛将以"促进自由贸易与经济开放""强化全球商业与投资网络""推动可持续贸易 与创新""加强政策倡导与贸易便利化""促进新兴市场与贸易包容性""打造自由贸易知识与研究枢纽""推 动危机应对与贸易韧性"为重要目标，成为倡导自由贸易与经济一体化的重要平台。论坛聚焦全球自由 贸易与经济一体化，将通过汇聚关键利益相关方如政策制定者、企业领袖和智库专家，讨论、推动自由 贸易并强化全球经济合作。 据了解，2024年11月举行的中国改革国际论坛上，中改院院长迟福林与世界自由区组织主席穆罕默 德·阿扎鲁尼共同签署中国(海南)改革发展研究院-世界自由区组织合作备忘录，双方将围绕世界自由区 发展开展合作研究、交流研讨等一 ...

此外，报道提到，特朗普目前正将保护主义作为其核心经济政策大力推行，而里夫斯对此表示拒绝，并支持自由贸易的替代方案。她 表示，"我们了解自由公平贸易与合作的益处。现在不是背弃世界的时候"。 特朗普4月2日在白宫签署行政令，宣布美国对贸易伙伴加征10%的"最低基准关税"，并对某些贸易伙伴征收更高关税。对此，欧盟委员 会主席冯德莱恩7日表示，欧盟将成立进口监测工作组，并将加强单一市场，以应对美国关税。她还表示，欧盟对关税谈判持开放态 度，但也准备在谈判失败时采取反制措施。美国共和党人、前副总统迈克·彭斯日前批评这一决定，表示特朗普政府广泛加征关税"失 策"，将给美国工薪家庭和企业带来沉重负担。 近期，美国政府对外实施广泛的、反复无常的关税政策，引发全球金融市场动荡，里夫斯在英国《观察家报》的一篇专栏文章中首次 表示，她"对未来的困难并不抱任何幻想"。《卫报》称，虽然里夫斯并未直接批评特朗普或其政策，但她明确表示相关影响将对经济 造成破坏，并决心采取行动，以缓解英国家庭对生活成本的不安全感。 《卫报》援引里夫斯的话称，她将在本月晚些时候举行的国际货币基金组织（IMF）会议上，提议建立一个新的"更加平衡的全球经济 和贸 ...

Group 1 - The article argues that extreme tariff measures by the U.S. will ultimately harm both the U.S. and its trading partners, as supported by historical and empirical evidence [1][7] - Historical economists, from Bastiat to List, have emphasized the importance of moderate tariffs and free trade for economic development, indicating that excessive tariffs can weaken domestic production capacity [1][2] - A study by French economist Philippe Aghion and others found that tariffs do not correlate positively with total factor productivity, while fiscal subsidies and tax incentives do [2][3] Group 2 - The article highlights that prior to joining the WTO, high tariffs on imported cars did not lead to a strong domestic automotive industry in China, demonstrating that tariff protection does not foster industrial progress [3][4] - Post-WTO accession, China has gradually reduced its average tariff rate to 7.3% by 2023, indicating a shift towards lower trade barriers [4] - The development of industries in Shenzhen, such as mobile phones and renewable energy vehicles, is attributed to market competition rather than tariff protection [5][6]

Core Viewpoint - The article argues that extreme tariff measures employed by the U.S. since April 2023 will ultimately harm both the U.S. and its trading partners, contradicting historical and empirical evidence supporting free trade [1][2]. Group 1: Historical Context and Economic Theory - The article references the "ineffective railway theory" proposed by French economist Frédéric Bastiat, which illustrates that tariffs can negate the benefits of reduced trade costs [1]. - German economist Friedrich List emphasized the need for moderate tariffs to avoid harming domestic production capacity and tax revenue [1]. - The consensus among economists from Adam Smith to Paul Krugman highlights the importance of free trade for global economic development [1]. Group 2: Empirical Evidence - A study by Harvard professor Philippe Aghion and others analyzed data from 1.06 million Chinese enterprises from 1998 to 2007, concluding that fiscal subsidies and tax incentives positively correlate with total factor productivity, while tariffs do not [1][2]. - The article cites China's experience before and after joining the WTO, where high tariffs did not strengthen the domestic automotive industry, while subsequent tariff reductions led to growth in various sectors through market competition [2]. Group 3: Economic Implications - Warren Buffett's assertion that tariffs on imports will ultimately translate into domestic taxes suggests that such measures are contractionary and detrimental to economic growth [2]. - The article concludes that the U.S. government's tariff strategies will not yield positive outcomes for the economy or industry progress, reinforcing the idea that protectionist policies are counterproductive [2].

尽管遭遇美国所谓"对等关税"，但今年第十三届中国电子信息博览会（CITE 2025）在深圳如期召开。 证券时报记者在现场看到，相比往年，今年不同肤色的海外参展观众明显增加。本届展会还设置了出海 主题论坛活动，并首次开设了"中国台湾科技馆"，展示了台企在AI智能驾驶辅助、创新半导体测试、AI 医疗系统、电子元器件等领域的最新成果和创新技术。 行业协会代表向证券时报记者表示，不看好美国所谓"对等关税"政策能长久实施，电子行业业内人士预 计，关税政策可能会影响全球供应链稳定，可能出现严重缺货。另外，有本土存储巨头表示将会坚定出 海战略，也有台商表示看好中国大陆供应链和市场前景，将继续推进在中国大陆设厂。 供应链稳定恐遭破坏 "我们相信自由贸易才能促进整个社会，甚至全球经济发展，（加征关税）绝对会受到大家的抵制，未 必能长久。"谈及美方实施的所谓"对等关税"，深圳台商协会科技创新委员会副主委兼总企划黄衍豊向 证券时报记者表示，虽然美国政府税收可能会增加，但是普通民众将面临重要终端商品大幅涨价。 继宣布实施所谓"对等关税"后，美国宣布，对数十个国家暂停征收"对等关税"90天。黄衍豊介绍，面临 美国政府一再变动，很多厂商 ...

Core Viewpoint - Elon Musk has expressed sharp criticism of the White House's trade agenda, highlighting internal divisions regarding President Trump's aggressive tariff policies [1][3]. Group 1: Musk's Criticism and Trade Policy - Musk shared a video of economist Milton Friedman emphasizing the importance of free trade, indicating his support for liberal trade policies [2]. - He criticized Trump's chief trade advisor, Peter Navarro, for promoting high tariffs, suggesting that such measures are a "wrong direction" [3]. - Musk's comments reflect a broader concern among some billionaires about the impact of Trump's tariffs on the U.S. economy and trade relationships [6][7]. Group 2: Market Reactions and Economic Concerns - Trump's new tariff policies have led to significant stock market declines and raised fears of a global economic slowdown [4]. - The imposition of widespread tariffs has created confusion about whether these measures are intended as long-term strategies or merely negotiation tactics [6]. - Bill Ackman, a hedge fund manager, warned that the tariffs could destroy confidence in the U.S. as a trade partner and investment market [7][8]. Group 3: Government Officials' Perspectives - White House officials have provided varying explanations for the tariffs, with some suggesting they are meant to create leverage for negotiations [10][11]. - In contrast, others have taken a more hardline stance, insisting on the need to prevent other countries from taking advantage of the U.S. [12]. - Musk proposed the idea of establishing a free trade zone between the U.S. and Europe, advocating for zero tariffs [12]. Group 4: Internal Disputes and Responses - Navarro downplayed Musk's criticisms, suggesting that Musk's views are limited to his role as an automaker [13][14]. - The ongoing tensions between Musk and the Trump administration highlight differing priorities and approaches to economic policy [15][17].

Tariff Overview - The U.S. implemented reciprocal tariffs with a baseline rate of 10% on April 3, 2025, affecting major economies such as Vietnam (46%), China (34%), and the EU (20%) among others[1][9]. - The tariffs are based on the IEEPA from 1977, declaring a national emergency to impose these tariffs[1][9]. Economic Impact - The tariffs are expected to increase U.S. inflation, with a potential price increase of approximately 2.9% if the full 20% tariff burden is passed to consumers[2][10]. - The short-term impact on China's exports to the U.S. could result in a decline of about 5% in overall exports, with a mid-term effect of approximately 7%[3][20][23]. GDP Effects - A 5% decline in exports could directly reduce the current GDP by about 0.9%, potentially exceeding 1% when considering downstream effects[3][20][23]. - The estimated impact on GDP from the tariffs could be lower than projected due to U.S. importers potentially underreporting import prices[24]. Market Reactions - The initial phase post-tariff implementation may see a decrease in market risk appetite, favoring bonds over equities[4][42]. - A second phase may involve domestic policy responses that could restore risk appetite, benefiting risk assets[4][43]. Trade Dynamics - The tariffs may disrupt re-export trade, with an estimated impact of around $40.68 billion, equivalent to 1.6% of total exports and about 0.3% of GDP[3][33]. - The U.S. trade deficit with China is projected to decrease by approximately $75.7 billion annually, while surpluses with other countries may increase by $365.1 billion[3][33]. Structural Industry Impact - Consumer goods and machinery exports from China are likely to face significant challenges due to the tariffs, with electronics and appliances being particularly affected[4][38]. - The automotive sector may experience limited direct impact, as the U.S. is not a primary export market for Chinese vehicles[4][39]. Risk Considerations - There are risks associated with unexpected domestic fiscal and monetary policies, as well as potential retaliatory measures from the U.S. trading partners[4][44].

Group 1: Tariff Impact Analysis - The imposition of reciprocal tariffs has led to the highest U.S. import tax rate in nearly 100 years, raising concerns about a potential repeat of the global trade collapse seen during the Great Depression[2] - The effective tariff rate on U.S. imports is projected to reach 25%, exceeding levels during the Great Depression[4] - The impact of tariffs on the real economy is likely to be one-time, with countries able to counteract demand shocks through monetary, fiscal, and industrial policies[2][13] Group 2: Economic Resilience and Market Outlook - Unlike the Great Depression, the current global economic environment is stable, with no signs of widespread recession among major economies[6][10] - The recent tariff measures are expected to lead to a restructuring of the global trade system rather than its collapse, as major economies maintain commitments to free trade[10][11] - Following the panic sell-off triggered by the tariffs, there is potential for a rebound in China's equity markets[13] Group 3: Market Reactions and Future Considerations - Following the announcement of tariffs, global equity markets experienced significant declines, with the Wind All A Index dropping 9.3% in a single day[10] - The U.S. labor market remains resilient, with March non-farm payrolls increasing by 228,000, exceeding market expectations[20] - Market expectations for U.S. Federal Reserve rate cuts have increased, with projections now suggesting four rate cuts in 2025, totaling 100 basis points[24]

Core Points - The article discusses the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which significantly raised tariffs on thousands of imported goods in the U.S. by over 50% [5][4] - The act is widely regarded as a major economic mistake that contributed to the onset of the Great Depression [6][7] Historical Context - The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act was signed into law by President Herbert Hoover on June 17, 1930, amidst the economic turmoil following the stock market crash of 1929 [4][44] - The act was initially proposed to protect American farmers from foreign competition, but it expanded to include over 2,000 products due to political bargaining [29][25] Economic Impact - Following the implementation of the tariff, the U.S. stock market saw a significant decline, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropping from 250 points to 230 points, an 8% decrease [52] - U.S. imports from Europe fell from $1.334 billion in 1929 to $390 million in 1932, a 70% decline, while exports dropped from $2.341 billion to $784 million, a 66% decrease [52] - Unemployment rates surged from 7.8% in 1930 to 25.1% in 1933, marking the beginning of the Great Depression [53] Global Repercussions - The tariff prompted retaliatory measures from other countries, leading to a significant decline in global trade, with world trade levels in 1933 dropping to one-third of those in 1929 [55] - The act is seen as having undermined international trust and cooperation, accelerating the global economic downturn [58][64]