从贝森特的这番言论不难看出，美国那些政客并不是不知道，特朗普对全球加征关税所带来的长期负面影响。 美国财长的上述言论，从更深层次也可以理解为，美国并不是真的想要跟世界脱节，搞闭关锁国的那一套，特朗普只想在短期内向世界各国敲诈点利益，多 捞些"快钱"。 贝森特暗示关税会像"融化的冰块"一样被撤销，但前提是制造业回流美国，那么特朗普能实现这一点吗？ 近日，美国财长贝森特在接受日本媒体采访时表示：美国对其他国家进口商品征收的"对等关税"就像"融化的冰块"，可能会消失，但前提是所谓的贸易失 衡，得先按美国的标准"纠正"过来，制造业先回流美国。 这样做，一方面是自己任期内有钱花；另一方面，搞出一些能够超越前任总统并且标新立异的成就，为美国优先张目，为自己以及共和党脸上贴金。 但长期来看，美国仍然会继续融入全球化。 理由很简单，美元霸权离不开全球化。 但问题是，所谓的贸易失衡能够按照美国的标准"纠正"过来吗？制造业能回流美国吗？ 客观来讲，特朗普要想实现这两点，基本不太可能。 除非美国自己彻底放弃美元霸权。 因为在美国政府只要开动印钞机，就能从全球随便购买商品的背景下，他们的制造业怎么可能重振呢？ 既然能靠印钱就能过上轻 ...

刘元春：什么在左右美国关税谈判，中国如何取得战略先机？ 经济发展 ★★★★★ ），じた六以木止山Jヒ示。 ハハ四 绕汇率、公共安全、财政政策、产业 政策以及政府改革等方面的不确定 性，可能会更具冲击力。 要深入理解这一问题，需要从以 下三个方面展开思考：一是理清美国 将关税作为筹码进行相关谈判的基本 模式;二是深入把握"MAGA主义"在 未来几年的执政逻辑、政策出台顺序 及其背后的基本原则;三是要理解与 美国展开博弈的不同层级主体的反应 机制,以及全球经济体系正在发生的 结构性、革命性变化的本质。若无法 从上述三个维度形成清晰认识,将难 以对未来发展进行有效判断,目前市 场面临的不确定性可能在特朗普政策 节奏的推动下进一步加剧。 三大关键因素直接决定了美国关税谈 ポ 过去五个月,特朗普政府多次将 关税作为筹码进行要挟和打压,对全 球市场产生了一系列冲击，超出了传 统认知范畴,但其中仍有三个可以把 握的关键因素。 第一，关税冲击对全球形势的影 响具有里程碑意义,其中最为重要的 是,全球金融市场的震荡远超预期。 自4月2日(即"解放日") 以来，尽管从 绝对数值上看,全球金融市场已开始 有所填补前期的跌幅，但每一 ...

Core Viewpoint - The International Monetary Fund (IMF) warns that tariffs are not a solution to global economic imbalances, highlighting the risks associated with excessive trade deficits and surpluses [2][3]. Group 1: Global Economic Assessment - The IMF's 2025 External Sector Report evaluates the trade status of 30 major economies, which account for approximately 90% of global GDP [2]. - In 2024, the global current account balance as a percentage of world GDP is expected to increase by 0.6 percentage points, reversing a trend of decline since the 2008-2009 financial crisis [2]. - The report indicates that the U.S. trade deficit will expand by $228 billion in 2024, reaching $1.13 trillion, reflecting macroeconomic imbalances within the U.S. [2]. Group 2: Tariffs and Trade Wars - The IMF asserts that tariff barriers have minimal impact on improving trade imbalances and warns that escalating trade wars could significantly affect the global macroeconomy [2]. - Short-term effects of higher tariffs may reduce global demand and exacerbate inflationary pressures by increasing import prices [2]. Group 3: Currency and Financial Stability Risks - The report expresses concerns about the stability of the international monetary system due to rising geopolitical tensions, which could disrupt financial stability [2][3]. - The U.S. dollar has depreciated by 8% since January, marking the largest semi-annual decline since 1973, prompting global investors to reassess their exposure to dollar risks [3]. - The rise of stablecoins and innovations in cross-border transactions may reinforce the dollar's dominance but could also introduce financial stability risks [3].

Core Viewpoint - The International Monetary Fund (IMF) warns that tariffs are not a solution to global economic imbalances, highlighting the risks associated with excessive trade deficits and surpluses [1][2]. Group 1: Global Economic Assessment - The IMF's 2025 External Sector Report evaluates the trade status of 30 major economies, which account for approximately 90% of global GDP [1]. - In 2024, the global current account balance as a percentage of world GDP is expected to increase significantly by 0.6 percentage points, reversing a trend of narrowing since the 2008-2009 financial crisis [1]. Group 2: U.S. Trade Deficit - The U.S. trade deficit is projected to widen by $228 billion in 2024, reaching $1.13 trillion, indicating macroeconomic imbalances within the U.S. [1]. - The IMF warns that the effectiveness of tariff barriers in improving trade imbalances is minimal, and escalating trade wars could have significant negative impacts on the global macroeconomy [1]. Group 3: Currency and Financial Stability Risks - The rise of protectionism is casting a shadow over global bilateral trade, direct investment, and securities investment flows, potentially leading to a fragmented international monetary system and increased financial volatility [2]. - The U.S. dollar has depreciated by 8% since January, marking the largest semi-annual decline since 1973, raising concerns about currency risk [2]. - The IMF acknowledges that while the dollar will maintain its dominant position, recent trade tensions and rising U.S. debt levels may prompt global investors to reassess their exposure to dollar risks [2]. - The emergence of stablecoins, particularly dollar-backed stablecoins, could reinforce the dollar's dominance but also pose financial stability risks [2].

Group 1 - The Japanese Finance Minister Kato stated that tariffs are not a reasonable tool to reduce trade imbalances [1] - Emphasized the importance of open and free trade [1] - Expressed concerns over the uncertainties caused by tariffs initiated by U.S. President Trump [1]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. government's imposition of tariffs on Kazakhstan has raised concerns about the country's economic relations, particularly with China and Russia, as it seeks to balance its strategic partnerships while facing pressure from the U.S. [1][5][7] Group 1: Tariff Announcement and Impact - President Trump announced a 25% tariff on imports from Kazakhstan, effective August 1, as part of a broader trade strategy targeting nearly 20 countries [1][7] - The tariffs are expected to affect less than $100 million worth of Kazakh products, which constitutes about 5% of its exports, while over 90% of its exports to the U.S. will remain tariff-free [7] - Kazakhstan's trade department has submitted proposals to improve bilateral trade relations and is awaiting a response from the U.S. [7][8] Group 2: Economic Relations with China - Kazakhstan has significantly deepened its economic ties with China, with trade volumes now ten times greater than those with the U.S. [4] - The country is becoming a potential hotspot for critical minerals and rare earth metals, essential for electric vehicle production and other advanced technologies [2][4] - A recent discovery of a large rare earth deposit could position Kazakhstan as one of the largest rare earth reserves globally, further attracting investment [2] Group 3: Strategic Positioning - Kazakhstan is strategically located between China and Russia, and it aims to avoid over-reliance on either neighbor while seeking investment from Europe and North America [5] - Analysts suggest that the U.S. tariff threats may inadvertently push Kazakhstan closer to China and Russia, undermining the U.S.'s position as a balancing power in the region [5] - The country has historically been a significant recipient of U.S. investment, particularly in oil and gas, but recent trends show a decline in U.S. investments [1][5]

Group 1 - The core point of the article highlights the surge in demand for weight loss drugs and concerns over tariffs, which have propelled Ireland to become the second-largest source of the U.S. trade deficit [1] - In the first four months of this year, the U.S. imported $36 billion worth of hormone drug ingredients from Ireland, more than double the total imports from Ireland for the entire previous year [1] - Nearly 100% of these imports are destined for Indiana, where Eli Lilly, the manufacturer of weight loss drugs Zepbound and Mounjaro, is headquartered [1] Group 2 - The trade deficit has increased, but these drugs are transforming the healthcare landscape, with Novo Nordisk becoming the highest-valued company in Europe [1] - Novo Nordisk is investing billions of dollars to build factories in the U.S., which may alleviate trade imbalances in the long term [1] - Concerns over tariffs have led to a stockpiling trend, with companies rushing to ship goods to the U.S. before tariff deadlines [2] Group 3 - Ireland is at the center of a global stockpiling trend, as it is a major hub for U.S. pharmaceutical giants, partly due to favorable tax policies [2] - The demand for weight loss drugs is currently enormous, prompting companies to build safety stocks [3] - The trade imbalance has placed Ireland in a difficult position, as it was recently placed on the U.S. Treasury's currency manipulation monitoring list [3] Group 4 - Eli Lilly holds a significant position in the weight loss drug market, with sales of its GLP-1 drugs Mounjaro and Zepbound expected to nearly double this year to around $30 billion [4] - Maintaining the supply of weight loss drugs poses challenges for both Eli Lilly and its competitor Novo Nordisk, which manufactures Ozempic and Wegovy [4] - The demand for air logistics has surged, with transportation companies noting an increase in requests for drug shipments, which are typically transported by air due to their lightweight and high value [4]

Group 1 - The EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic stated that despite the new tariffs imposed by the US on steel and aluminum products, trade negotiations between the EU and the US are progressing in the "right direction" [1] - The US government raised tariffs on steel and aluminum products from 25% to 50%, citing national security as the reason, which has intensified trade barriers [1] - The EU has approved tariffs on €21 billion worth of US goods as a countermeasure to Trump's metal tariffs, targeting politically sensitive agricultural products and other items [2] Group 2 - The EU is preparing to impose additional tariffs on €95 billion worth of US goods in response to Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs and automotive tariffs, which will include products like Boeing aircraft and American-made cars [2] - The OECD warned that the trade tensions initiated by Trump have significantly worsened the global economic outlook, particularly affecting the US [3]

Core Points - A U.S. federal court has blocked President Trump's tariff policy announced on April 2, ruling that he overstepped his authority by imposing comprehensive tariffs on countries that export more to the U.S. than they import [1][3] - The court's 49-page ruling stated that only Congress has the power to regulate trade with other nations, thus prohibiting the Trump administration from executing tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) [3][4] - The White House has expressed strong opposition to the ruling, claiming that non-elected judges should not dictate responses to national emergencies and that the administration will use all executive powers to address the crisis [1][3] Tariff Policy Implications - The court has mandated that the U.S. government must issue new enforcement notices to all customs ports within 10 days to implement the ban on tariffs, and during this period, the Customs and Border Protection must cease collecting tariffs based on IEEPA [4] - If the Trump administration's request for a stay of the ruling is not approved, the ban will take effect after 10 days, potentially reducing tariffs on China to around 12% [4] - The ruling has rendered previous tariff orders ineffective immediately upon issuance, and the government must publish necessary administrative orders to enforce the permanent ban [4] Responses from China - China's Ministry of Commerce reiterated the U.S. court's ruling and criticized the unilateral tariff measures, stating they have not resolved U.S. issues but have instead harmed international trade order [6] - The Chinese Foreign Ministry emphasized that there are no winners in a trade war and that protectionism ultimately harms all parties involved [6] Future Strategies - Amid the legal challenges, Trump's trade team is reportedly considering a backup plan involving a two-step approach: first, imposing a maximum 15% tariff globally for 150 days to address trade imbalances, and second, developing personalized tariffs for each major trading partner during that period [6][8]

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration is facing significant legal challenges regarding its tariff policies, prompting the consideration of a backup plan involving a two-step approach to implement tariffs more effectively [1][3][4]. Group 1: Legal Challenges and Responses - The U.S. International Trade Court ruled that the Trump administration's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs was illegal, which has created a setback for the tariff strategy [3][4]. - Following this ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals temporarily reinstated the tariff measures, allowing the Trump administration to continue its tariff policies while exploring alternative legal frameworks [3][4]. - The Trump team is considering invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose a broad 15% tariff for 150 days, which would address trade imbalances with other countries [4][5]. Group 2: Proposed Two-Step Plan - The first step of the proposed plan involves a temporary broad tariff, while the second step would involve personalized tariffs for major trading partners based on Section 301 of the same Trade Act [4][5]. - This two-step plan is seen as more legally sound compared to the previously challenged IEEPA-based tariffs, as Section 301 has a history of being used effectively in trade disputes [9][10]. - The Trump administration believes that this approach could maintain leverage in ongoing trade negotiations without interruption from court rulings [4][5]. Group 3: Market Reactions and Implications - The uncertainty surrounding the tariff policies has led to fluctuations in the Wall Street market, reflecting investor concerns about the potential impacts of these legal challenges on trade negotiations [3][10]. - Analysts suggest that if the court's ruling against the IEEPA-based tariffs is upheld, it could eliminate key obstacles in U.S.-EU trade negotiations, paving the way for a more balanced agreement [10][11]. - The potential for a more pragmatic approach from both the U.S. and EU could lead to a resolution that benefits both parties, particularly in sectors like steel and automotive, which are currently under scrutiny [10][11].