新华社北京12月10日电 12月10日,《新华每日电讯》发表题为《"烧钱抢量的粗放模式走到头了"——电 商投流费用从模糊到"明牌"，撬动行业深层变革》的报道。 电商直播间灯火通明，一场场秒杀在屏幕上轮番上演；平台后台，投流预算数字不断滚动。这几年，在 我国电商版图上，流量成了商家必争之地。然而，当"让更多人看到我"的投流成为常规操作，如何界定 其与传统商业广告之间的关系，成为不少人的疑问。 今年7月，国家市场监管总局发布广告法适用问题执法指南，聚焦"何为商业广告"这一核心问题，明晰 了新技术、新模式不断演进下，商业广告和其他商业宣传的边界。这纸新规，将流量推入"明亮的审计 室"。从此以后，投向流量的每一分钱，不再只是企业账面上的"成本"，而要回到广告费、业务宣传费 的本位，纳入监管的视野。 政策落地初期，谁最先经受考验？ 新华每日电讯记者调研发现，围绕电商"投流费用"，过去长期存在模糊地带：某些平台开具的是技术服 务费、信息服务费发票，实际功能却兼具广告展示、算法分发、销售佣金等多重属性。就此，《计算广 告》作者、中国传媒大学广告与品牌学院客座教授刘鹏表示，当这些复杂职能被统一打包为技术服务费 发票时，税务定 ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent statements from EU officials highlight the deepening trade friction between the US and EU regarding digital economy governance, emphasizing the EU's commitment to its "sovereign" digital regulations [1][2]. Group 1: EU Digital Regulations - The EU's Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act are characterized as "sovereign legislation" and will continue to be implemented, covering all digital platforms operating in the EU market [1]. - The EU's regulatory framework applies to any company providing services within the EU, regardless of its headquarters location, indicating a strong stance on jurisdiction [1][2]. - The EU has identified major tech companies like Google, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, and ByteDance as "gatekeepers," with potential fines of up to 20% of global revenue for violations [2]. Group 2: US-EU Trade Relations - The US has expressed concerns over the EU's digital regulations, with President Trump warning of high tariffs and export restrictions on countries implementing discriminatory policies [1][2]. - The EU's digital service tax, which targets revenues from digital services, has been adopted by several European countries with rates typically set between 2% and 3% [1][2]. - The EU has indicated that the digital service tax is a separate issue from US-EU trade agreements, suggesting potential retaliatory measures if trade negotiations fail [3]. Group 3: Broader Implications - The divergence in digital governance reflects deeper economic philosophical differences, with the US favoring minimal regulation and the EU advocating for high standards of protection [2][3]. - The ongoing digital regulatory dispute may complicate the already slow progress of the US-EU trade framework agreement, which faces legislative hurdles [3]. - The struggle for digital governance authority signifies a broader reallocation of power in the global digital economy, with significant implications for international digital governance [3].