中美贸易战就像路易十六，根本看不到头。 川子这边刚和咱们签完一年期 " 停战协议 " ，结果美国车企就又来上压力了。 前几天，美国《华尔街日报》就报道说，特斯拉很有可能在未来一到两年内，不再使用中国生产的零部件制造美国本土汽车，咱们国内的一些企业，估计 又要被 gank 一波。 不是，老马，你想干嘛？这边吃着中国的饭，回去就想砸咱们的碗？ 其实说实话，这事儿还真由不得他。在今年 5 月的时候，特朗普就表示，美国汽车制造商必须在美国本土完成整车和零部件的全部生产，否则就是各种关 税伺候。 原因就是美国一直以来的政策。比如在 2023 年，老美出台的《通胀削减法案》，直接包含了对咱们电池产品的禁令。 法案里明确要求，美国车企使用的电池组件和关键矿物（比如锂、镍、钴、石墨），不能有中国、俄罗斯、朝 鲜、伊朗等企业的成分，否则就拿不到 7500 美元的税收减免。 | 抵免项目 | 抵免金额 | 适用条件 | 例外条件 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 关键矿产 税收抵免 | 3750美元 | 电动车所用材料和"关键矿 物"须有一定比例开采来自 | 如果电池原材料的关键矿物是 由受特定政府（包 ...

日本的稀土独立梦，一开始就像是一场高风险的国运豪赌。它赌的是中国在稀土领域的主导地位，认为总有一天会被打破。但13年过去了，回头看，这一策 略的结果并非成功，而是被印度的杀猪盘狠狠宰了，甚至连自己的一些技术进展也成了自打脸的证据。最后，他们才发现，自己从印度进口的所谓印度稀 土，实际上还是通过中国转手过来的。这不单纯是赌输了，简直是根本没有站对赌桌。 在2010年，中国因为钓鱼岛撞船事件对日本实施了稀土出口管制。当时，中国将对日本的稀土出口量从2009年的5万吨急剧降低至2011年的约3万吨，造成了 40%的供应缺口。这一举动让日本的制造业瞬间陷入困境。由于没有足够的稀土库存，丰田的生产线一度停工三个月，整个汽车产业链受到严重冲击，客户 投诉也不断。 就在这一时刻，日本才真正意识到卡脖子意味着什么。从那一年起，日本开始全力推进稀土突围计划，政府大力投入资金，试图减少对中国稀土的依赖，打 算实现去中国化。然而，这个计划最终在2025年6月被印度的一刀断供给彻底打断了。 为了突破中国的稀土控制，日本在过去13年里采取了很多行动。它与蒙古合作，向澳大利亚矿山投资，甚至在法国建立稀土回收基地，深海采矿的项目更是 烧钱 ...

或许是看到了高市早苗的下场，见识到了中国反击手段的强硬，最近，欧洲的外交场出现了一种微妙的 变化。 更关键的是，欧洲曾试图通过《关键原材料法案》推动本土开采，却因社区抵制、审批缓慢、成本高昂 而举步维艰。 有数据显示，欧洲矿业项目的平均审批时间比中国长20倍以上，且多数项目因环保争议搁浅。 芯片领域的情况同样严峻。 此前荷兰政府对安世半导体采取强制接管措施后，中国随即收紧相关材料出口许可，导致欧洲汽车行业 陷入恐慌。 德国企业警告称，若供应链进一步中断，部分车企可能面临停产。欧盟委员会内部文件显示，企业投诉 纷纷飞向布鲁塞尔，迫使外交系统不得不"降低调门"，优先稳住供应。 我们要清楚的是，语气放软不代表政策转向。尽管欧盟在外交言辞上放低了姿态，其实际政策却未见软 化。 据《南华早报》报道，近日，布鲁塞尔传出消息，欧盟悄悄要求下属官员调整对华发言基调，在公开谈 论中国时"调低音量"，避免刺激性措辞，以确保稀土和芯片等关键物资的谈判顺利推进。 结合近期中欧之间的摩擦，便能发现：欧洲的"温和"并非善意，而是被现实逼出的妥协。 以稀土为例，中国在全球稀土永磁体产能中占据绝对主导地位，欧洲的电动车、风电、军工产业几乎无 ...

Core Viewpoint - Elon Musk's recent decision to eliminate Chinese-made parts from Tesla's supply chain is primarily driven by the need to comply with U.S. government electric vehicle subsidy policies, despite the potential financial drawbacks involved [1][3][11]. Group 1: Strategic Shift - Tesla has mandated global suppliers to remove all Chinese-manufactured components within two years to align with U.S. subsidy requirements [1][3]. - The Inflation Reduction Act stipulates that to qualify for up to $7,500 in subsidies, vehicles must not contain Chinese-made parts, affecting batteries, chips, and raw materials [3][5]. - The decision to "decouple" from China is seen as a forced move rather than a strategic choice, as the company faces significant cost increases and supply chain restructuring challenges [7][11]. Group 2: Financial Implications - Analysts estimate that completely abandoning Chinese components could lead to a 42% increase in battery costs, significantly impacting Tesla's profitability in a highly competitive market [2][15]. - The production costs at Tesla's U.S. factories have already surged by 12% to 15% due to tariffs on Chinese goods, further squeezing profit margins [5][15]. - The shift may result in higher vehicle prices or reduced profit margins, ultimately affecting consumers and the broader electric vehicle market [15][18]. Group 3: Competitive Landscape - China remains a leader in the global electric vehicle industry, with advanced battery technology and a mature supply chain that is difficult to replicate elsewhere [8][10]. - European automakers are increasing their procurement of Chinese components, recognizing the importance of Chinese technology for maintaining competitiveness [11][13]. - Chinese companies like CATL and BYD are establishing local production facilities in Europe to circumvent policy barriers, demonstrating a more flexible and long-term strategy compared to Tesla's approach [13][15]. Group 4: Broader Industry Impact - Tesla's move reflects a larger trend in the global electric vehicle supply chain being influenced by geopolitical factors, leading to potentially irrational business decisions [17][18]. - The ongoing tension between the need for U.S. market compliance and reliance on Chinese technology may hinder Tesla's innovation and product competitiveness [15][18].

2025年11月12日，路透社独家报道了一条震惊全球汽车圈的消息。通用汽车已向全球数千家供应商下达指令，要求在2027年前彻底清除供应链 中的中国产原材料与零部件。部分供应商被设定了2027年的最后期限，必须完全切断采购联系。 路透社在其报道中提到，通用汽车全球采购负责人希尔潘·阿明表示，供应链的抗风险能力至关重要，必须确保对自身供应链拥有更强的掌控力，清楚 了解每一批货物的来源。 通用汽车之后，特斯拉也发出了类似指令。据外媒报道，2025年11月15日，《华尔街日报》在报道中援引知情人士称，特斯拉要求其供应商在生产美国 汽车时排除中国制造的零部件，并计划在未来一两年内将所有其他零部件都更换为中国以外地区生产的零部件。 很显然，两家汽车公司在贯彻"去中国化"，将汽车产业的地缘政治博弈推向高潮。但他们想掌控汽车配套供应，真的能脱离中国零部件吗？ 两家公司在美国的经济影响 通用汽车是美国的老牌汽车企业，是美国传统汽车的代表。特斯拉则是后起之秀，近年来的市场增长率远超通用汽车，比通用汽车更有活力。这两家公 司对美国经济的影响力较大，在中美竞争的关键时期发布这些决定，需要引起高度重视。 英国《经济学人》杂志曾发表一篇 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the paradox of the U.S. striving for independence from China in rare earth production while facing significant supply chain challenges, particularly in consumer goods like Christmas trees, which are heavily reliant on Chinese imports [1][10][24]. Group 1: Rare Earth Industry - U.S. Treasury Secretary Becerra announced the production of the first domestically made rare earth magnet in 25 years, attributing this achievement to previous government policies aimed at reducing reliance on China [3][12]. - Despite the announcement, the U.S. still lacks the necessary technology and infrastructure for large-scale rare earth production, with 80% of global processing capacity and 90% of magnet production still in China [12][16]. - The U.S. faces a long road ahead to achieve self-sufficiency in rare earths, with significant cost implications, as Chinese rare earth prices are approximately 25% lower [17][24]. Group 2: Consumer Goods and Supply Chain - The U.S. imports 90% of its Christmas goods from China, particularly from Yiwu, which has started redirecting its products to the EU due to high tariffs imposed by the U.S. [7][10]. - U.S. Christmas tree imports dropped by 58% in August and 70% in September compared to the previous year, leading to skyrocketing prices for consumers [7][10]. - The tariffs imposed by the Trump administration have significantly increased costs for American consumers, with a Christmas tree that originally cost $1,000 now potentially costing $2,000 [10][19]. Group 3: Economic Implications - The tariffs have resulted in an estimated additional annual expenditure of about $800 per American household due to inflation caused by these trade policies [17][19]. - The article emphasizes that the push for "decoupling" from China has led to unintended consequences, affecting everyday consumers rather than achieving the intended political victories [24][25]. - The U.S. is caught in a structural anxiety, wanting to develop high-end industries while still relying on low-end manufacturing from China, highlighting the complexity of the supply chain dynamics [24][25].

Core Viewpoint - Germany is pushing for "digital sovereignty" by excluding Chinese suppliers like Huawei from its 6G network development while seeking to reduce dependence on both the US and China in technology [1][4]. Group 1: Germany's Policy on 6G and Chinese Suppliers - German Chancellor Merz announced the complete exclusion of Chinese suppliers from the country's 6G network, emphasizing a shift towards domestically produced components [1]. - The German government plans to phase out Chinese technology from its 5G network by 2026 and remove all Chinese equipment by the end of 2029 [1]. - Despite these plans, approximately 60% of Germany's telecom equipment still comes from China, with Huawei being a preferred partner due to its cost-effectiveness [1]. Group 2: EU Pressure and Legal Proposals - The European Commission is considering making its 2020 recommendations to stop using "high-risk suppliers" in mobile networks legally binding, which could lead to lawsuits and financial penalties for non-compliance [2]. - The proposal aims to enforce compliance among member states regarding security guidelines set by the Commission [2]. Group 3: Financial Implications and Domestic Concerns - Germany is contemplating using public funds to compensate telecom operators for replacing Huawei equipment, with costs exceeding €2 billion (approximately ¥165 billion) for the transition [4]. - The establishment of a €500 billion infrastructure fund, referred to as a "fiscal rocket launcher," raises concerns about the efficiency of public fund usage amid additional spending [5]. Group 4: International Relations and Trade - While Germany aims to reduce reliance on China, Chancellor Merz acknowledged that complete decoupling is not feasible, as China remains Germany's second-largest trading partner [5]. - German Vice Chancellor and Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil is scheduled to visit China for high-level financial dialogues, indicating ongoing engagement despite the push for digital sovereignty [5]. Group 5: China's Response - China has firmly opposed the security allegations made by the EU against Chinese telecom companies, arguing that there is no evidence to support claims of security risks and highlighting the positive contributions of these companies to the European telecom sector [6].

Core Insights - The visit of U.S. Treasury Secretary Besant to eVAC's rare earth mineral processing center symbolizes the end of China's "stranglehold" on the U.S. supply chain, marking the production of the first rare earth magnet in 25 years in the U.S. [1] - Besant's display of the magnet is seen as a political gesture rather than a significant breakthrough, as the company had already been producing rare earth magnets since 2022 [3] - The narrative that China is "choking" the U.S. supply chain is challenged, as the U.S. initiated the "decoupling" policy itself, leading to the establishment of production facilities in the U.S. by foreign companies [3] Industry Overview - China's control over rare earth materials is primarily focused on components rather than a complete blockade of the U.S. [5] - The U.S. can still access necessary raw materials through applications and reviews despite export restrictions [5] - The U.S. is actively seeking to diversify its rare earth supply chain by investing in partnerships with other countries, including a recent commitment of $1 billion to Central Asian nations for technology cooperation [5] Political Context - Besant's promotion of the first U.S.-made rare earth magnet is perceived as a political show aimed at gaining favor with President Trump, reflecting the U.S.'s commitment to "decoupling" from China [6] - The U.S. strategy appears to be reactive, with a tendency to boast about achievements once restrictions are eased, indicating a complex relationship with its allies [8]

Group 1 - The core point of the article highlights a significant easing of tensions in the US-China trade war, marked by mutual tariff reductions and the suspension of port fees, driven by domestic inflation pressures in the US and upcoming elections [1][3]. - The US has reduced the so-called "fentanyl tariff" on China from 20% to 10% and suspended 24% equivalent tariffs and export control rules for a year, indicating a strategic retreat rather than a genuine concession [3]. - The Philippines has shifted its stance by resuming electronic visa services for Chinese citizens, aiming to recover lost tourism and investment, reflecting a survival strategy amid geopolitical tensions [1][6]. Group 2 - The Philippines' economy is heavily reliant on China, with bilateral trade reaching $87.7 billion in 2023, and losing access to the Chinese market could severely impact its fishing, agriculture, and tourism sectors [5]. - Southeast Asia is increasingly embedded in China's supply chain, with countries like Vietnam and Malaysia relying on Chinese components, highlighting the paradox of "decoupling" from China [5]. - The region is pivoting towards China, as evidenced by infrastructure projects like the China-Laos railway, which is expected to increase freight volume significantly, while US initiatives like the Trans-Pacific Partnership have lost relevance [5][7].

Core Viewpoint - The recent proposal by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to redesign the New Taiwan Dollar has sparked criticism, with accusations that it is part of a broader strategy to sever ties with mainland China [1] Group 1: Political Context - The DPP's actions, including the redesign of currency and renaming of streets, are seen as attempts to eliminate elements brought from mainland China to Taiwan [1] - The spokesperson for the Taiwan Affairs Office, Chen Binhua, characterized these actions as a deliberate "de-Sinicization" effort by the DPP [1] Group 2: Cultural Implications - The DPP's initiatives are viewed as efforts to disrupt the historical and cultural connections between Taiwan and mainland China [1] - Despite these attempts, it is asserted that the historical fact of both sides belonging to one China cannot be altered, and the national identity of Taiwanese people as part of the Chinese nation remains intact [1]