Core Viewpoint - China has reiterated its stance against tariff increases, emphasizing that trade wars and tariff battles yield no winners and that protectionism is not a viable solution [1][2]. Group 1: China's Position on Tariffs - China has consistently opposed tariff wars and the use of tariffs as tools for coercion, stating that arbitrary tariff increases do not benefit any party involved [2]. - The BRICS mechanism is highlighted as an important platform for cooperation among emerging markets and developing countries, promoting openness and inclusivity without targeting any specific nation [1][2]. Group 2: U.S. Tariff Developments - The U.S. is approaching a deadline for tariff negotiations set for July 9, with President Trump indicating that a combination of letters and agreements will be sent out to various countries [3][4]. - Trump confirmed that the related tariffs are set to take effect on August 1, with potential letters involving different amounts and wording for various economies [4]. - The U.S. has proposed significant "reciprocal tariffs" on allies, with rates as high as 25% for some countries and even higher for Southeast Asian nations [5]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Context - The U.S. International Trade Court has ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not grant the President unlimited authority to impose tariffs, leading to questions about the legality of unilateral tariff notifications [7][8]. - Legal experts suggest that unilateral tariff imposition may violate international law and could be challenged in the World Trade Organization (WTO) [8].

Core Viewpoint - Canada has decided to cancel its digital services tax to facilitate trade negotiations with the United States, aiming for an agreement by July 21, 2025 [1][3]. Group 1: Digital Services Tax Cancellation - The Canadian government announced the cancellation of the digital services tax, which was set to impose a 3% tax on revenues from tech companies providing services to Canadian users, effective from June 30 [1][3]. - The decision to cancel the tax is seen as a concession to the Trump administration, following pressure from Canadian business leaders and associations [3][4]. - The cancellation is expected to help establish a new economic and security relationship with the U.S. and create job opportunities for Canadians [3][4]. Group 2: Trade Negotiations Context - The trade dispute escalated quickly, with the U.S. halting negotiations after Canada announced the tax, leading to potential new tariffs on Canadian goods [1][3]. - The Canadian Business Council's CEO emphasized the need for Canada to propose a plan to cancel the tax in exchange for the U.S. lifting tariffs [4]. - Experts have criticized the Canadian government's approach, suggesting that the unilateral cancellation of the tax may not significantly impact the broader trade negotiations [4]. Group 3: Broader Trade Negotiation Challenges - Despite the cancellation of the digital services tax, U.S. trade negotiations with various partners, including the UK, have not progressed as expected, with only limited agreements reached [5]. - Ongoing investigations into tariffs on products like semiconductors and pharmaceuticals have created uncertainty in U.S. trade discussions with major partners [5]. - Legal disputes regarding the imposition of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act have added further complexity to the trade landscape [5][6].

Group 1 - The article discusses the announcement by Canada to impose a digital services tax on U.S. tech companies, which President Trump described as a "direct and blatant attack" on the U.S. [1] - The digital services tax, effective from June 28, 2024, will charge a 3% tax on certain total revenues related to online markets, targeted advertising, social media platforms, and user data [3] - The tax applies to companies with global annual revenues exceeding €750 million (approximately $833 million) and digital service revenues in Canada exceeding CAD 20 million (approximately $14.3 million), affecting major tech firms like Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Uber, and Airbnb [3] Group 2 - The U.S. Trade Representative's office criticized the design of most digital services taxes, claiming they discriminate against U.S. companies while excluding domestic firms from similar taxation [5] - The Biden administration previously opposed the tax, and the U.S. Trade Representative requested dispute resolution consultations with Canada under the USMCA regarding the digital services tax [5] - U.S. industry groups and lawmakers have urged Canada to cancel or suspend the tax, but Canada’s Finance Minister confirmed that the tax will proceed as planned [5] Group 3 - U.S. Treasury Secretary indicated that the U.S. is likely to initiate a Section 301 investigation in response to Canada's digital services tax, which could lead to more lasting tariffs compared to those imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [7] - The Section 301 investigation allows the U.S. Trade Representative to investigate "unreasonable or unfair trade practices" by other countries and recommend unilateral sanctions [7] - Legal experts expressed surprise at the U.S. government’s delayed response to the ongoing dispute with Canada over the digital services tax [7]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. has terminated all trade negotiations with Canada in response to Canada's newly announced digital services tax, which President Trump described as a direct attack on American companies [1][3]. Group 1: Digital Services Tax Overview - Canada has implemented a 3% digital services tax on certain total revenues related to online markets, targeted advertising, social media platforms, and user data, effective June 28, 2024, retroactive to January 1, 2022 [3]. - The tax applies to companies with global annual revenues exceeding €750 million (approximately $833 million) and digital service revenues in Canada exceeding CAD 20 million (approximately $14.3 million), impacting major tech firms like Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Uber, and Airbnb [3]. - The Canadian government estimates that the digital services tax will generate over CAD 59 billion in revenue over five years starting from 2024-2025 [3]. Group 2: U.S. Opposition to the Tax - The U.S. Trade Representative's office has criticized the design of most digital services taxes, claiming they discriminate against American companies while exempting local firms from similar taxation [4]. - The digital services tax imposes significant retroactive tax liabilities and will have an immediate impact on U.S. companies [4]. Group 3: U.S. Government Actions - The Biden administration previously opposed the tax and requested dispute resolution consultations with Canada under the USMCA, but did not take further action after the consultation period [5]. - U.S. industry groups and lawmakers have urged Canada to cancel or suspend the tax, but Canada’s Finance Minister confirmed that the tax will proceed as planned [5]. - The U.S. Treasury Secretary indicated that the U.S. is likely to initiate a Section 301 investigation in response to Canada’s digital services tax, which could lead to more enduring tariffs compared to those imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [6].

Group 1 - The U.S. President Trump has halted trade negotiations with Canada due to Canada's announcement of a digital services tax on U.S. tech companies, which he described as a "direct and blatant attack" [1][2] - Trump stated that the U.S. will inform Canada within a week about the tariffs that will apply to trade with the U.S. [1][2] - Following Trump's announcement, the Canadian dollar depreciated, and the U.S. dollar rose sharply against it, reaching a high of 1.3760 [2] Group 2 - Canadian business and political leaders are urging Prime Minister Carney to cancel the digital services tax to revive trade negotiations with the U.S. [3] - The CEO of the Canadian Business Council suggested that Canada should propose a plan to eliminate the digital services tax in exchange for the U.S. lifting tariffs [3] - Ontario's Premier Doug Ford also called for the cancellation of the digital services tax [3] Group 3 - U.S. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin indicated that the U.S. may initiate a "Section 301 investigation" in response to Canada's digital services tax [5][6] - The Section 301 investigation could lead to more enduring tariffs compared to those imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [6] - The U.S. has previously initiated Section 301 investigations against other countries regarding their digital services taxes [6] Group 4 - The Canadian Finance Minister had previously suggested that the digital services tax could be part of broader trade negotiations with the U.S. [4] - The U.S. Treasury Secretary mentioned that tariffs resulting from a Section 301 investigation could last longer than those imposed under other legal frameworks [6]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, indicated a tendency for the U.S. Trade Representative to initiate a Section 301 investigation into digital services taxes [1] Group 1 - The potential investigation is aimed at addressing concerns regarding digital services taxes imposed by other countries [1] - This move could have significant implications for international trade relations, particularly with countries that have implemented such taxes [1] - The investigation may lead to tariffs or other trade measures against countries that the U.S. deems to be unfairly taxing American companies [1]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing trade tensions between China and the United States have led to significant shifts in trade patterns, particularly in the oil sector, with China halting imports of U.S. crude oil for two consecutive months, resulting in the lowest U.S. crude oil export levels since 2020 [1][8]. Group 1: Trade Relations and Tariffs - The U.S.-China trade war began in 2018, initiated by the Trump administration's imposition of tariffs on $34 billion worth of Chinese goods, citing trade deficits and intellectual property concerns [1][3]. - China responded with tariffs ranging from 5% to 25% on U.S. products, significantly impacting U.S. agricultural exports, particularly soybeans [3]. - The trade conflict escalated with the U.S. targeting Chinese tech firms like Huawei, leading to further tariffs on $1.2 trillion and $1.8 trillion worth of Chinese goods [3][4]. Group 2: Economic Impact - The U.S. trade deficit has increased from $950.2 billion in 2018 to $1,211.75 billion in 2024, indicating that the tariffs have not achieved their intended goal of reducing the trade deficit [7]. - Over 90% of the tariff costs have been passed on to U.S. importers, downstream businesses, and consumers, leading to increased prices and living costs in the U.S. [7]. - Despite facing some export pressures, China has shown resilience by expanding domestic demand and diversifying trade partnerships, maintaining stable economic growth [7]. Group 3: Energy Sector Dynamics - The halt in U.S. crude oil imports by China is attributed to the U.S. tariff policies, which have diminished the price advantage of U.S. crude oil for China [8]. - The U.S. shale oil producers are projected to face losses of at least $10 billion due to the absence of the Chinese market, with U.S. crude oil exports dropping to 3.883 million barrels per day, a 4% decrease [8]. - China is actively seeking to diversify its energy imports, with agreements in place with Russia and Qatar to secure alternative oil and gas supplies [8]. Group 4: Global Economic Implications - The trade war has disrupted global supply chains, forcing multinational companies to reallocate resources and adjust production strategies, thereby increasing operational costs and risks [10]. - The unilateral actions by the U.S. have undermined the multilateral trade system, leading to slower progress in global trade negotiations and increasing trade disputes among nations [10]. - Some Southeast Asian countries have benefited from the trade war as they become alternative production bases for multinational companies, while those reliant on U.S.-China trade face economic slowdowns [10].

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration has announced an increase in tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from 25% to 50%, effective June 4, 2025, citing national security as the primary reason for this adjustment [1][3]. Group 1: Tariff Adjustments - The increase in tariffs aims to provide greater support to the steel and aluminum industries and reduce the threat these imports pose to national security [3]. - An exception is made for imports from the UK, which will maintain the 25% tariff, allowing for negotiations on new tariffs or quotas before the July 9 deadline [3][4]. Group 2: Ongoing Investigations - Multiple Section 232 investigations are still ongoing, and the outcomes could lead to similar tariff adjustments for other industries, making them a point of concern for foreign trade enterprises [1][5]. - Industries currently under Section 232 investigations include semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, wood, copper, heavy trucks, and critical minerals [5]. Group 3: Economic Implications - The imposition of tariffs is expected to increase production costs for U.S. manufacturers reliant on imported intermediate goods, potentially harming their competitiveness in international markets [6]. - The OECD has revised its economic growth forecast for the U.S. down from 2.2% to 1.6% due to the impact of Trump's tariff policies [6].

Report Summary 1. Hot News - The U.S. Trade Representative's Office extended the exemption period for the Section 301 investigation against China until August 31, originally set to expire on May 31. China has repeatedly lodged solemn representations with the U.S. over Section 301 tariffs, which violate WTO rules, disrupt international trade, and burden U.S. businesses and consumers [2] - Goldman Sachs' commodities research team said the U.S. is investigating copper imports under Section 232 and has doubled steel and aluminum import tariffs to 50%, increasing the likelihood of copper import tariffs. Goldman Sachs raised its H2 2025 aluminum price forecast by $140/ton to $2280/ton, expecting it to drop to $2100/ton in early 2026 and reach $2230/ton and $2500/ton in 2026 and 2027 respectively, lower than previous forecasts [2] - The U.S. April core PCE price index rose 2.5% year-on-year, in line with expectations and slower than the previous revised 2.7%, the smallest increase in over four years. The "super core inflation indicator" also hit a four-year low. Traders still bet on a Fed rate cut in September [3] - China's May manufacturing PMI was 49.5%, up 0.5 ppts month-on-month; non-manufacturing PMI was 50.3%, down 0.1 ppt; composite PMI was 50.4%, up 0.2 ppts. New export and import order indices rose 2.8 and 3.7 ppts respectively. Some U.S.-related enterprises reported improved foreign trade [3] - OPEC+ agreed to increase oil production by 411,000 barrels per day in July, the third consecutive monthly increase. The eight OPEC+ members will meet on July 6 to decide August production policy [3] 2. Sector Performance - Key sectors to watch: urea, lithium carbonate, asphalt, soybean oil, hot-rolled coils [4] - Sector percentage changes: non-metallic building materials 2.71%, precious metals 30.65%, oilseeds and fats 11.88%, soft commodities 2.44%, non-ferrous metals 19.05%, coal, coke, steel and ore 13.59%, energy 2.60%, chemicals 12.83%, grains 1.58%, agricultural and sideline products 2.67% [4] 3. Sector Positions - Information about the recent five-day changes in commodity futures sector positions is presented, but specific numerical changes are not clearly stated [5] 4. Performance of Major Asset Classes - Equity: The Shanghai Composite Index fell 0.47% daily, with a monthly change of 0.00% and an annual change of -0.13%. Other indices like S&P 500, Hang Seng Index, etc., also had different performances [7] - Fixed income: 10-year, 5-year, and 2-year treasury bond futures had different daily, monthly, and annual changes [7] - Commodities: CRB commodity index, WTI crude oil, London spot gold, etc., showed various changes [7] - Others: The U.S. dollar index and CBOE volatility index also had corresponding changes [7]

（原标题：关税，突发！美国宣布，延长！） 商务部发言人表示，美方申请书中充斥大量不实指责，将正常贸易投资活动曲解为损害美国家安全和企 业利益，将自身产业问题归咎于中国，既缺乏事实依据，也有悖经济常识。美多份研究报告显示，美造 船业因过度保护在多年前就已失去竞争优势。美方为本国产业提供数以千亿计美元的歧视性补贴，却指 责中方采取所谓"非市场做法"。事实上，中国产业的发展是企业技术创新和积极参与市场竞争的结果， 美方指责根本站不住脚。 美国上届政府启动对华301调查并对华加征关税，已被世贸组织裁定违反世贸规则，受到众多世贸成员 的反对。美方出于国内政治需要发起新的301调查，是一错再错。 商务部敦促美方尊重事实和多边规则，立即停止错误做法，回到以规则为基础的多边贸易体制中来。中 方将密切关注调查进展，并将采取一切必要措施，坚决捍卫自身权益。 综合自：美国贸易代表办公室、商务部网站 责编：李丹 豁免期限延长了。 当地时间5月31日消息，美国贸易代表办公室（Office of the United States Trade Representative）宣布延长 对中国在技术转让、知识产权和创新方面的行为、政策及做法 ...