美国政府资金主要来源于借债。每年财政赤字巨大，税收不够，必须不断发债维持运转。但债务总量是有限制的，一旦达到上限，必须获得国会同意提高债 务上限。然而，美国的政治局势日益极化，妥协变得越来越困难。一边要求削减开支，另一边又没有政治意愿妥协，导致政府关门成为常态。 这并不意味着中美关系破裂，而是中国对当前局势的审慎反应。早期，中国大量购买美债，是因为美元相对稳定，美国经济状况尚可。但如今，美国财政危 机四伏，通货膨胀起伏不定，利率波动频繁，政府频繁争执债务上限，这使得投资美国国债的风险增大。全球经济正在转型，各国都在寻求新的增长点和合 作伙伴，中国自然也不例外。 近日，美国政府再次上演了"关门停摆"的老戏码。这一幕虽然早已不新鲜，但此次的背景却有些特别——在美国财政困难、预算难以达成时，中国悄悄减持 了大量美国国债，仅在七个月内就处理了500亿美元。 乍看之下，这两个事件似乎没什么直接关联，但一结合，便形成了一种微妙的"节奏"。美国白宫一片惶恐，而中国则在默默布局。这让人不禁要问：这一 招，真的奏效了吗？ 中国减持美债，绝非一时冲动或情绪化的决定，而是经过深思熟虑的战略选择。美国近年来财政状况持续恶化，财政赤字 ...

更让人难以忽视的是，美国自身的财政状况正变得越来越糟。长期高额支出与低效财政管理导致赤字不 断扩大，如今已达入不敷出的地步。白宫不仅无法有效解决债务危机，反而试图通过提高关税、金融施 压等方式，将问题甩锅给中国。但这些手段收效甚微，反倒让美国的经济压力进一步加剧。连"股神"巴 菲特都忍不住发声警告，表示对美国的财政赤字前景感到忧虑。他的担忧并非空穴来风，美债市场的动 荡已经让许多机构投资者变得谨慎，美国政府若无法找到新的"接盘侠"，债务危机可能会在未来彻底爆 发。 美债市场的震荡只是中美较量的缩影之一。事实上，中国选择在这个时间点果断抛售美债，正是对美国 近期一系列不友好举措的回应。今年以来，美国在多个领域加大对华施压，包括对中国新能源产品加征 高额关税，炒作"产能过剩"议题，以及在南海地区制造紧张局势。这些行为无异于火上浇油，让中美关 系进一步紧张。 中国的反击也很直接——不打口水仗，直接动手。美债市场的波动，美国金融体系的承压，都在向华盛 顿传递一个明确的信号：中国手中掌握着足够的筹码，有能力精准出手，让美方感受到压力。而随着中 美金融战线的角力持续，谁将笑到最后，答案已越来越清晰。 美国的金融体系正经历 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights the escalating financial rivalry between China and the United States, particularly in the context of recent interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve and subsequent actions by China and Japan [1][3]. - China has significantly reduced its holdings of U.S. Treasury bonds, with a total reduction of $53.7 billion (approximately 382 billion RMB) in the past four months, indicating a strategic shift in its foreign asset management [3][5]. - Japan's unexpected decision to gradually sell its exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and real estate investment trusts (J-REITs) is seen as a major disruption, potentially affecting the Federal Reserve's interest rate decisions and reflecting a shift in Japan's monetary policy due to persistent inflation pressures [5]. Group 2 - The article notes that the recent phone communications between U.S. and Chinese leaders suggest a potential thaw in relations, yet the financial sector remains a battleground, with China actively diversifying its foreign exchange assets and increasing gold reserves [3]. - The U.S. is facing dual pressures from both China and Japan, with the prolonged intervals in trade negotiations indicating a need for the Trump administration to pivot from confrontation to pragmatic cooperation to alleviate economic pressures [5]. - The ongoing financial rivalry is poised to reshape the global economic landscape, prompting countries to closely monitor developments and adjust their economic strategies accordingly [5].

Group 1 - The U.S. Treasury invested $8.9 billion to acquire nearly 10% of Intel's shares, marking a significant shift in government involvement in the tech sector [1][3] - Intel has invested $108 billion in capital expenditures and $79 billion in R&D over the past five years, yet its market value is only one-tenth of Nvidia's [3] - The U.S. government aims to enhance national security, recover finances through dividends, and gain influence over Intel's board by acquiring shares [3][9] Group 2 - China's response to the U.S. investment was notably calm, with significant advancements in domestic chip production, including a 92% yield rate for Yangtze Memory Technologies [5] - Chinese chip imports have decreased by 18% in the first seven months of the year, while domestic equipment exports have increased by 34% [5] - The U.S. technology blockade has proven ineffective, as Chinese companies have made significant progress in advanced manufacturing processes [7][9] Group 3 - A separate chip manufacturing corridor is emerging, with TSMC and Samsung expanding their operations in China, alongside local firms [9] - Intel's cost per 7nm wafer is approximately $9,000, while China's SMIC can produce the same at $6,000, indicating a potential pricing advantage for Chinese manufacturers [9] - The contrasting strategies of U.S. nationalization and China's market-driven approach highlight a broader shift in global economic roles [12]

Group 1 - The article discusses the collapse of the "free market" myth in the U.S. due to government intervention and the rise of China's semiconductor industry during this upheaval, highlighting two contrasting development models and national strategies [1][19] - In August 2025, the U.S. government demanded Intel's CEO resign and initiated discussions for a transfer of nearly 10% of its shares, marking a shift towards a "subsidy for equity" model that spread to other semiconductor giants like Samsung and TSMC [2][4] - The U.S. government's unprecedented fiscal pressure, with a record $400 billion deficit and nearly $37.8 trillion in national debt, has led to the acquisition of equity in major tech firms as a means to stabilize market confidence [4][6] Group 2 - The "chip nationalization" strategy is significantly altering global supply chains, with companies like TSMC and Samsung facing demands to relinquish management rights and share profits from operations in China [8] - In contrast, China's semiconductor sector has thrived, with the A-share semiconductor index surging 24.6% since August, driven by a strong expectation for "self-controlled" chip enterprises and a shift in investor sentiment towards domestic technology [10][19] - China's financial system has demonstrated resilience against U.S. financial pressures, with measures such as increasing gold reserves and promoting the internationalization of the yuan, further reducing reliance on the U.S. dollar [13][15] Group 3 - The competition between the U.S. and China represents two distinct models: the U.S. opting for direct market intervention and equity acquisition, while China focuses on financial openness and policy support to enhance the autonomy and security of its financial system [17][19] - China's recent financial policies, including interest rate cuts and support for innovation, aim to stabilize the market and create a multi-layered capital ecosystem, potentially transforming its financial landscape [17][19]

当地时间 8 月 22 日，美联储主席鲍威尔在杰克逊霍尔全球央行年会上放了个 "信号"：现在美国经济前景和 "风险平衡" 跟以前不一样了，所以美联储可能 要调整政策了。 实际上，从特朗普入住白宫前就开始施压鲍威尔降息，甚至喊出了裁撤美联储、辞退鲍威尔的话，但美联储咬紧牙关，一直坚持8个月不降息，目前美国联 邦基金利率仍维持在4.25%-4.5%之间。鲍威尔现在的松口有多方面因素，一是看出了特朗普的"大势不可逆"，特朗普对全球加税的结果不管如何，都被美国 共和党宣传成了"新的胜利"，比如在欧洲、亚洲和拉美等地，重新确定了双边税率，相对于此前有了不同程度的提高，有人算过一笔账，按照这个关税，美 国在10年后将增加2.7万亿美元收入，还不算欧洲和日韩等承诺的对美投资。 俄乌冲突方面，尽管美俄阿拉斯加会晤虎头蛇尾，但欧洲和乌克兰却吓得够呛，紧急访问华盛顿不说，还送去了1500亿欧元的采购订单。如今特朗普在美国 可谓是"如日中天"，白宫副幕僚长称其为"不可思议的前6个月总统任期"。在这种背景下，鲍威尔的立场似乎有些动摇了。 二是特朗普带来的压力巨大。为了迫使美联储降息，特朗普政府双管齐下，一面利用司法手段指控美联储工作 ...

来源：圆方你怎么看啊-- 01 过去24小时，金融圈两件事值得我们去思考和关注。 中国8月1日下午，财政部、国家税务总局联合公告，自8月8日起，对在该日期之后（含当日）新发行的 国债、地方政府债券、金融债券的利息收入，恢复征收增值税。 此次恢复在实施路径上采取了"新老划段"的方式。对在2025年8月8日之前已发行的国债、地方政府债 券、金融债券（包含在2025年8月8日之后续发行的部分）的利息收入，继续免征增值税直至债券到期。 美国8月1日下午，理事库格勒（Adriana Kugler）将辞职提前离开美联储董事会，于8月8日正式生效。 库格勒任期原定于2026年1月31日结束。 按照流程，特朗普有权提名一位美联储理事来接替库格勒，并完成他剩余任期。一些猜测集中在特朗普 可能会选择一位潜在的未来主席来填补这一空缺的想法上。 02 上面这两件事，都属于当下"影响有限，但未来延展性"挺强的事。 拿国债收增值税来说，有观点认为没有了税收减免，按常理一般会提高政府债的新发行利率，从而增加 政府的利息支出；另一方面，取消税收减免会直接增加政府的增值税收入。 这一加一减之间，似乎并没有什么增减和改变，这个政策影响似乎不大， ...