在不到三周的时间里，特朗普接连发出四项关税威胁。一般情况下，这类威胁会令投资者感到不安、使 企业首席执行官们神经紧张，经济学家们会纷纷调低对目标国家的增长预测。 然而，金融市场和企业高管们对特朗普最新涉及伊朗贸易伙伴、格陵兰岛支持者、加拿大和韩国的警告 大多表现得不以为意，认为这些仅仅是其为了获得筹码或改变对方行为的言论而采取的行动，并不会动 真格。 根据研究的一项新分析，特朗普并不总是"认怂"。更准确地说，研究发现他将威胁付诸行动的情况约占 四分之一。约43%的威胁后来被撤回（有时伴随着特朗普宣称取得了所谓的胜利），或者从未正式实 施。 机构经济研究的Nicole Gorton-Caratelli和Chris Kennedy审查了从2024年11月大选到上周日期间，特朗普 发出的 49项关税威胁或其政府发起的贸易调查（该统计不包括他最新目标韩国）。研究发现，其中超 过一半的威胁尚未完全落地。 观察这49项声明的时间线可以发现，大多数完全执行或进入调查阶段的动作发生在2月至9月之间。 每月的分类数据显示，随着对生活成本（负担能力）的担忧压低了他的民意支持率，特朗普的关税威胁 在去年年底趋于减少。 "这一规律并 ...

今日周四（12月25日）因圣诞节休息，2025年全球央行黄金储备连续三年破千吨，Q3净购金315吨，为 金价提供结构性支撑。COMEX主力合约年内累计涨幅超70%，近期屡创历史新高，最高触及4525.70美 元/盎司。 打开APP，查看更多高清行情>> 【要闻速递】 12月25日环球时报报道，美国政府23日宣布将于2027年对中国芯片加征关税，标志着上届拜登政府发起 的相关贸易调查正式结束。美媒分析指出，尽管美方声称中国芯片产业"损害美国利益"，但最终决定至 少18个月内不额外加税，彭博社将此视为美方巩固中美"休战"、稳定关系的新信号。 美国贸易代表办公室去年12月启动针对中国成熟制程芯片的301调查，旨在评估其对美国经济影响。经 近一年意见征询与数据评估，美方周二公布结果，称中国追求半导体主导"不合理"，构成美商业负担， 故可采取行动。《纽约时报》称，美方将先对进口中国半导体加征0%关税，2027年6月起上调（幅度待 定，提前30天公布）。 报道指出，此类芯片广泛用于手机、汽车、家电、电信乃至军工领域，美两党担忧依赖加深成"国家安 全威胁"，中国在该领域的巨额投入已令美企运营承压。中国外交部发言人林剑24日 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration is dissatisfied with the regulation of large American digital tech companies abroad and is pressuring the EU, South Korea, and the UK to ease restrictions on these companies [1][3]. Group 1: Regulatory Pressure - The U.S. Trade Representative's office is pressuring the EU, South Korea, and the UK to lower digital taxes and relax user privacy protection regulations, viewing these policies as disproportionately targeting American tech giants [1][3]. - On September 5, the European Commission imposed a €120 million fine on Elon Musk's social media platform X under the EU's Digital Services Act, marking a significant enforcement action [4]. Group 2: Trade Investigations and Actions - U.S. Trade Representative Jamison Greer hinted at a potential trade investigation into the EU's digital regulatory policies, emphasizing that the goal is to reach a negotiated outcome rather than impose higher tariffs [5]. - The U.S. Trade Representative's office has canceled a scheduled meeting with South Korean officials due to ongoing discussions in the South Korean parliament regarding new digital regulations [5]. Group 3: Potential Retaliation - The U.S. Trade Representative's office warned that if the EU continues to restrict American service providers' competitiveness, the U.S. will have to use all available means to retaliate, naming specific European companies as potential targets [4][5]. - The U.S. has suspended the execution of a technology cooperation agreement with the UK due to dissatisfaction with the UK's digital regulatory policies [5]. Group 4: Industry Concerns - Measures taken by the Trump administration are viewed as "less stimulative," as there is a reluctance to impose tariffs that could disrupt preliminary trade agreements and raise inflation concerns among the American public [6]. - Industry representatives express uncertainty about how aggressive the government's policies should be, fearing that a trade war in the digital sector could ultimately harm their own interests [6].

Core Viewpoint - U.S. medtech stocks experienced a decline following the U.S. Commerce Department's initiation of a probe into medical device imports, which may result in tariffs [1] Group 1 - The U.S. Commerce Department's investigation into medical device imports could impact the financial performance of companies in the medtech sector [1] - The potential for tariffs on imported medical devices raises concerns about increased costs for companies reliant on foreign manufacturing [1]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Department of Commerce has initiated an investigation into the imports of robots, industrial machinery, medical devices, medical supplies, and personal protective equipment [1] Group 1 - The investigation targets multiple sectors, indicating a potential regulatory shift that could impact supply chains and market dynamics [1] - The focus on medical devices and personal protective equipment suggests heightened scrutiny in response to recent health crises [1] - The outcome of this investigation may lead to changes in import tariffs or regulations affecting the cost and availability of these products in the U.S. market [1]

Group 1 - President Trump threatened to initiate a trade investigation to nullify discriminatory fines imposed by Europe on U.S. tech firms, particularly targeting Google [1][2] - The threat came after Google faced a nearly $3.5 billion penalty from the European Union related to an antitrust case concerning its advertising technology business [2] - Trump expressed concerns that these fines are diverting funds that could otherwise be invested in American jobs and investments, labeling the situation as unfair to American taxpayers [3]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Department of Commerce has initiated an investigation into solar photovoltaic cells and modules imported from India to assess whether these products are being sold at unfairly low prices or receiving unfair government subsidies [1] Group 1 - The investigation will evaluate the imports for the year 2024 [1] - Similar investigations are also being conducted against Indonesia and Laos [1]

Core Viewpoint - The Japanese government is investigating the alleged unfair low pricing of galvanized steel plates and steel strips imported from China and South Korea, which is believed to be harming the domestic industry [2][4]. Group 1: Investigation Announcement - The Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and the Ministry of Finance announced on August 13 that they will investigate the low pricing of galvanized steel plates and steel strips from China and South Korea [2]. - The investigation will require manufacturers and importers from China, South Korea, and Japan to submit relevant information, with a completion timeline of approximately one year [2][4]. Group 2: Market Impact - In Japan's 2024 imports, South Korean products account for nearly 50%, while Chinese products make up about 40% [4]. - Japanese companies such as Nippon Steel, Nippon Steel Sheet, Kobe Steel, and Yodogawa Steel Works submitted requests for tariff increases to the Japanese Finance Minister in April, citing losses due to the low prices of imports from China and South Korea [4].

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Department of Commerce has initiated an investigation into certain rebar concrete imports from Vietnam, starting from June 24 [1] Group 1 - The investigation applies to imports from Vietnam, Egypt, Bulgaria, and Algeria [1]

1. Report Industry Investment Rating No relevant content provided. 2. Core View of the Report - After Trump's re - election, his actions such as claiming sovereignty over Greenland and the Panama Canal, mediating the Russia - Ukraine war, imposing wide - range tariffs, and conducting a 301 investigation on China's maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding industries have brought many uncertainties to the shipping industry. This report focuses on the implementation measures of the US 301 ship investigation and its potential impact on the costs of US - bound routes [3]. - The report analyzes three types of fees proposed by USTR, discusses the optimal fee - payment plans for different operators, calculates the cost increase for operators, and suggests potential countermeasures and their impacts [3][4][9][23]. 3. Summary by Relevant Catalogs 3.1 First - Class Fees: For Chinese Operators - The main affected operator is COSCO Shipping (including its subsidiary Orient Overseas). Considering the average scale of container ships and net tonnage, it is more beneficial for them to choose to pay a maximum fee of $1 million per entry into US ports [7]. - The charging scenario is that when any ship of a Chinese operator enters a US port, it can choose either to pay a maximum fee of $1 million or to pay based on the ship's net tonnage at a maximum rate of $1,000 per net ton [8]. 3.2 Second - Class Fees: For Operators with Chinese - Built Ships - Charging scenario: If an operator's fleet has Chinese - built ships and its operating routes involve US ports, all of its Chinese - built or non - Chinese - built ships will be subject to fees. It is unclear whether Chinese operators need to pay both "as a Chinese operator" and "for holding Chinese - built ships" fees [10]. - There are three charging schemes. Operators can choose the most favorable one. For example, COSCO Shipping (including Orient Overseas) and CMA CGM find Scheme (a) more favorable; Maersk, Hapag - Lloyd, and Mediterranean Shipping choose Scheme (c) currently as they have less than 25% Chinese - built ships in their current fleets; ONE selects Scheme (a) and may switch to Scheme (c) if the proportion of Chinese - built ships drops below 25%; Evergreen, HMM, and Yang Ming choose Scheme (c) as their proportion of Chinese - built ships is low and unlikely to exceed 25% in the future [10][20][22]. 3.3 Third - Class Fees: For Operators Ordering Ships from Chinese Shipyards - Charging scenario: For operators that have ordered ships from Chinese shipyards, their ships will be charged when docking at US ports [26]. - Different operators have different optimal fee - payment schemes and fee levels based on the proportion of ships ordered from Chinese shipyards and the expected delivery proportion in the next 24 months. For example, COSCO Shipping, Orient Overseas, CMA CGM, Hapag - Lloyd, ONE, and Mediterranean Shipping are in the $1 million fee level; HMM and Yang Ming are exempt from fees; Evergreen may be in the exempt or $750,000 fee level depending on the measurement method; Maersk may be in the $750,000 or $1 million fee level depending on the measurement method [27][28]. 3.4 Fee Reduction Scenario - Operators using US - built ships can apply for a refund on a calendar - year basis. Each entry of a US - built ship into a US port allows the operator to get a maximum refund of $1 million. However, due to the extremely low proportion of US - built ships (less than 1%), only a few operators will benefit [35]. 3.5 Operator Cost Calculation and Potential Countermeasures - Cost calculation: HMM and Yang Ming are not affected by the proposed fees. COSCO Shipping (including Orient Overseas) is the most affected, with a theoretical high - value cost of up to $2.69 million per ship per entry into US ports if paying all relevant fees. CMA CGM and ONE need to pay between $1.2 million and $1.54 million. Evergreen, Maersk, Hapag - Lloyd, and Mediterranean Shipping need to pay between $750,000 and $1 million [40][43]. - Potential countermeasures and impacts: Operators can reduce the number of US port calls, which may lead to congestion at large ports and a decline in traffic at small ports; increase transshipment through Canada or Mexico, but need to consider high inland transportation costs and limited facilities; replace small ships with large ones on US - bound routes, but face limitations such as port efficiency and canal passage; transfer Chinese - built ships out of US - bound routes and move non - Chinese - built ships in [44].