分析师: 陶川 执业证号: S0100524060005 邮箱:taochuan@mszq.com 分析师: 邵翔 执业证号: S0100524080007 邮箱:shaoxiang@mszq.com 分析师:林彦 执业证号: S0100525030001 邮箱:linyan@mszq.com 继关税、减税、俄乌、伊以之后，特朗普带给市场的下一个"惊喜"会是什 A 么?自上台以来，特朗普一直在推进自己"重构世界"的事业，闹出了不少动静 政策成果有限,最大的成效可能是不断刷新市场的认知、给市场带来波动。那么 下一个"惊喜"的伏笔会在哪?一些苗头已经逐步浮现,例如我们在之前的报告 《伦敦会谈：贸易谈判的"分水岭" ? 》 所分析,贸易摩擦开始从关税向供应链 之争转变,除此之外,最近在参议院如火如荼讨论的减税和支出法案(也称"美 丽大法案",One Big Beautiful Bill Act)也提供了重要线索,毕竟钱从哪来、往 哪花最能表明政府的"初心"。 相关研究 1.美联储政策观察:7月降息的政治博弈-202 5/06/25 2. "十五五" 规划系列报告 (二)："十五五" 规划的初步线索-2025/06/ ...

Group 1: Tax and Spending Provisions - The "Beautiful Bill" is expected to increase the deficit by $3.8 trillion over ten years due to tax cuts and spending increases[2] - The bill includes $1.44 trillion for defense spending over the next decade, with a focus on shipbuilding and missile defense[2] - Welfare spending cuts will target Medicaid, student loans, and food assistance programs, among others[2] Group 2: Debt and Deficit Impact - The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts the bill will increase the deficit by $500 billion by 2026, raising the deficit-to-GDP ratio from 5.5% to 7.0%[3] - Over ten years, the total deficit increase is estimated at $2.4 trillion, potentially raising total debt by $3 trillion if interest is included[3] - If the tax cuts are made permanent, the total debt increase could reach $5 trillion, with the deficit amounting to 6.8% of GDP[3] Group 3: Legislative Challenges - The Senate and House have differing views on key provisions, particularly regarding the SALT deduction cap and Medicaid cuts[4] - The Senate version proposes a $5 trillion debt ceiling increase, compared to the House's $4 trillion[5] - There is a significant push for the Senate to finalize the bill before the July 4 deadline, despite ongoing disagreements[5] Group 4: International Tax Provisions - The bill includes the controversial 889 clause, which may impose taxes on foreign entities that engage in "unfair taxation" against U.S. companies[6] - The 889 clause aims to increase revenue by approximately $120 billion over ten years, averaging $12 billion annually[8] - The clause reflects a shift from tariffs to international tax negotiations, indicating a potential change in U.S. trade policy focus[9]