香港交易及結算所有限公司及香港聯合交易所有限公司對本公告的內容概不負責，對其準確性 或完整性亦不發表任何聲明，並明確表示，概不對因本公告全部或任何部份內容而產生或因依 賴該等內容而引致的任何損失承擔任何責任。 Shanghai Haohai Biological Technology Co., Ltd.* 上海昊海生物科技股份有限公司 （於中華人民共和國註冊成立的股份有限公司） （股份代號：6826） 海外監管公告 本公告乃由上海昊海生物科技股份有限公司（「本公司」）根據《香港聯合交易所有 限公司證券上市規則》第13.10B條的規定刊發。 茲載列本公司在上海證券交易所網站刊登之《上海昊海生物科技股份有限公司 2025年半年度報告》，僅供參考。 承董事會命 上海昊海生物科技股份有限公司 主席 侯永泰 中國上海，2025年8月22日 於本公告日期，本公司之執行董事為侯永泰博士、吳劍英先生、陳奕奕女士及唐 敏捷先生；本公司之非執行董事為游捷女士、黃明先生及魏長征先生；及本公司 之獨立非執行董事為沈紅波先生、姜志宏先生、蘇治先生及楊玉社先生。 * 僅供識別 上海昊海生物科技股份有限公司2025 年半年度报告 公司代码 ...

Group 1 - India and Russia announced an expansion of bilateral trade cooperation, indicating that U.S. tariffs on Indian imports of Russian oil are unlikely to disrupt their partnership [1] - The bilateral trade volume between India and Russia is projected to reach a record $68.7 billion by March 2025, with India facing a trade deficit of $59 billion due to increased oil imports [1] - India aims to increase exports of pharmaceuticals, agricultural products, and textiles to Russia to address the current trade imbalance [1] Group 2 - India has become the second-largest buyer of Russian oil, importing an average of 1.6 million barrels per day in the first half of 2025, a significant increase from 50,000 barrels per day in 2020 [2] - The geopolitical dynamics suggest that U.S. tariffs may serve as leverage for trade negotiations rather than solely targeting Russian oil revenue [3] - The ongoing energy cooperation between India and Russia is seen as a strategic alliance amidst global geopolitical tensions [3]

Core Viewpoint - The recent economic talks between China and the U.S. in Stockholm are seen as a stabilizing force in the turbulent global economy, highlighting the importance of dialogue in resolving trade differences and enhancing global economic governance [1] Group 1: Paradigm of Major Power Cooperation - China and the U.S. have formed a deeply intertwined economic relationship, with a projected trade volume of $688.28 billion in 2024 despite trade frictions [3] - The agreement reached during the talks reflects that major powers can achieve mutual benefits through equal dialogue, serving as a model for other countries facing trade disputes [3] - Both sides reached a consensus on canceling or suspending tariff increases, which accommodates their respective industries and provides a predictable policy environment for market participants [3] Group 2: Rational Strategic Wisdom - China maintains a pragmatic negotiation approach while safeguarding its core interests, countering U.S. strategies aimed at reshaping global trade through tariffs [4] - The U.S. aims to reduce reliance on global supply chains by promoting the return of key industries, while also seeking to improve trade balances through increased exports of agricultural products and energy [4] - China's core resources and technological advantages serve as leverage in negotiations, supporting the pursuit of fair agreements [4] Group 3: Long-term Strategic Preparation - China remains strategically aware of the profound changes in the global economic landscape and prepares for long-term negotiations amid uncertainties [5] - The country is accelerating the establishment of a "dual circulation" development pattern to strengthen its domestic market, enhancing resilience against external changes [5][6] - The essence of negotiations is communication and finding common ground, with the belief that the U.S.-China economic relationship is fundamentally about mutual benefit [6]

Group 1 - The EU and the US announced a new trade agreement on August 21, detailing that the US will impose a 15% tariff on most EU goods, including cars, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and timber, while exempting certain natural resources, aircraft, and generics [1] - The EU will eliminate tariffs on US industrial products and provide preferential market access for US seafood and agricultural products, with plans to purchase $750 billion of US liquefied natural gas, oil, and nuclear products by 2028, along with $40 billion in US AI chips [1] - The EU is expected to increase its investment in US strategic industries by $600 billion, indicating a significant shift in economic relations [1] Group 2 - EU officials and experts express concerns that the agreement is unfair and will negatively impact the European economy, highlighting an imbalance favoring the US [3][5] - The EU's trade commissioner confirmed that important sectors like wine and spirits were not included in the tariff reduction list, indicating ongoing negotiations to address these key interests [3] - The agreement is viewed as a "loss control document" for the EU, reflecting a deeper dependency on the US and potential friction points that may arise in the future [5]

Trade Agreements Overview - The Trump administration has reached trade agreements with the UK, EU, Japan, and South Korea, covering 38.6% of total US goods imports and 49.8% of the US trade deficit in 2024 (excluding the UK) [3] - The US-UK trade agreement includes a 10% base tariff and industry export quotas, with ongoing negotiations on specific details [4] - The US-Vietnam trade agreement proposes a 20% base tariff and a 40% tariff on re-exported goods, reflecting a significant imbalance in tariff rates [5] Tariff Structures and Economic Impact - The US-Japan trade agreement imposes a 15% base tariff on exports, with Japan committing to invest $550 billion in the US, aiming to boost domestic industrial production [5] - The US-EU agreement also includes a 15% base tariff, with the EU required to invest $600 billion in the US and purchase $750 billion in US energy by 2028 [5] - The tariffs on steel, aluminum, and copper range from 25% to 50%, with an estimated $70.7 billion in tariffs expected from these metals in 2024 [5] Future Implications - Industry tariffs are likely to become a central focus of Trump's trade policy, aimed at reducing the trade deficit and promoting domestic manufacturing [5] - The potential for increased tariffs on sectors such as pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and rare minerals is anticipated, with ongoing investigations into these industries [5] - The overall tariff revenue for the US is projected to exceed $28 billion by July 2025, indicating a significant reliance on tariff income [5]

Group 1 - The European Central Bank (ECB) President Christine Lagarde indicated that economic growth in the Eurozone may slow this quarter, despite a recent trade agreement with the U.S. reducing uncertainty, global trade conditions remain unclear [1] - Lagarde noted that the current 15% tariffs imposed by the U.S. on most European goods are slightly higher than the ECB's June assumptions but are "far below" the extreme rates envisioned by the bank [1] - The ECB is expected to maintain the deposit rate at 2% during the September meeting, following a pause in rate changes after eight consecutive cuts since June 2024 [1] - Lagarde mentioned that the ECB staff will consider the impact of the EU-U.S. trade agreement on the Eurozone economy in the upcoming September economic forecasts, which will guide future decisions [1] Group 2 - The Eurozone economy unexpectedly grew by 0.1% in the second quarter, demonstrating resilience amid trade and geopolitical pressures, with inflation hovering around the ECB's target of 2% [1] - Lagarde emphasized the Eurozone's resilience in the face of a challenging global environment earlier this year [2] - Lagarde confirmed her commitment to completing her term as ECB President, which will last until October 2027, amid rumors of her potential early departure [2]

Summary of Key Points from Conference Call Industry or Company Involved - The conference call primarily discusses the geopolitical dynamics involving the United States, Russia, and Ukraine, with a focus on trade relations between the U.S. and China. Core Points and Arguments 1. **U.S.-China Trade Relations**: The extension of the U.S.-China tariff agreement by 90 days indicates significant disagreements but also a willingness to negotiate further. Future trade tensions may be influenced by global economic conditions and domestic factors in both countries [4][10][12] 2. **U.S. Tariff Structure**: The U.S. has implemented a multi-tiered tariff policy on Chinese exports, including zero tariffs, reciprocal tariffs, industry-specific tariffs, and Section 301 investigations. The total additional tariffs currently stand at 40% [15][24] 3. **Russia's Territorial Demands**: Russia has proposed returning parts of occupied Ukrainian territory in exchange for security guarantees similar to NATO's Article 5. This reflects a hardline yet flexible diplomatic strategy [2][5][7] 4. **Trump Administration's Approach**: The Trump administration has shown flexibility in negotiations, emphasizing the need for a direct peace agreement rather than a mere ceasefire. This approach aims to balance U.S.-Russia relations while avoiding escalation [6][10] 5. **Ukrainian President's Dilemma**: Ukrainian President Zelensky faces pressure to accept territorial concessions for security guarantees, which is a challenging position given the sacrifices made by Ukraine during the ongoing conflict [8][9] 6. **European Leaders' Role**: European leaders have acted as mediators and supporters in the discussions, but their influence is limited due to internal challenges within Europe [9] 7. **Future U.S.-China Negotiations**: The U.S. and China are expected to engage in further negotiations regarding tariffs and trade policies, with potential adjustments to the current tariff structure based on outcomes from upcoming talks [12][26] Other Important but Possibly Overlooked Content 1. **Impact of Semiconductor Investigations**: The upcoming results of the U.S. semiconductor 301 investigation could become a new point of contention in U.S.-China trade relations [4][20] 2. **Potential for Tripartite Talks**: Anticipated talks among the U.S., Russia, and Ukraine could either alleviate tensions or exacerbate market risks depending on their outcomes [14] 3. **Manufacturing Repatriation**: There are signs of progress in U.S. manufacturing repatriation, exemplified by TSMC's new factory in Arizona, which has begun to generate profits [23] 4. **Long-term Structural Issues**: Despite short-term negotiations, the underlying structural issues in U.S.-China relations are expected to persist, requiring time and patience to resolve [4][25]

Core Viewpoint - The recent U.S.-Russia summit has shifted the global trade dynamics, leaving India as the sole victim of U.S. tariff policies, while China and Russia have gained breathing space [5][12][24]. Tariff Negotiations Breakdown - The sixth round of U.S.-India trade talks scheduled for August 25 was abruptly canceled by the U.S. delegation, leading to a significant setback for India [9][10]. - The U.S. is set to impose a 50% tariff on Indian exports, which includes a 25% base tariff and an additional 25% punitive tariff, effective August 27 [10][12]. Trade Relations and Economic Impact - The U.S. is India's most important trading partner, accounting for 20% of India's total exports, amounting to $86.5 billion last year [12]. - The imposition of tariffs is expected to severely cut profits for Indian exporters and threaten millions of jobs [12][24]. Comparison with China and Russia - Following the U.S.-Russia meeting, President Trump announced that there would be no new tariffs on China, providing them with a three-month buffer to negotiate [13][14]. - The U.S. has softened its stance towards Russia, while India has been left isolated, indicating a lack of leverage in the current geopolitical landscape [18][19]. India's Response and Future Outlook - Indian officials have expressed outrage over the U.S. tariffs, labeling them as "unfair" and "unreasonable," and have vowed to take necessary actions to protect national interests [17][22]. - Prime Minister Modi's call for domestic product consumption under the "Make in India" initiative is seen as insufficient to counteract the economic impact of U.S. tariffs [22][24]. - The ongoing tariff dispute may further deteriorate U.S.-India relations, with significant implications for India's economy and trade [24][26].

Core Viewpoint - The company, Fengshi Technology, is leveraging the abundant resources of Antarctic krill to innovate and upgrade its products from functional foods to health supplements, establishing itself as a leader in the industry with a strong focus on technology and innovation [1][4]. Group 1: Company Overview - Fengshi Technology has been recognized with multiple honors, including being named a national intellectual property advantage enterprise and a high-growth marine enterprise in Qingdao, showcasing its strong market position and brand value of 39.199 billion yuan [1]. - The company has invested in a transparent factory covering 18,000 square meters, featuring a GMP purification workshop, ensuring automated and traceable production processes [2]. Group 2: Industry Position and Innovation - The Antarctic krill is recognized as one of the largest biological resources on Earth, with a biomass of hundreds of millions of tons, and is praised for its high nutritional value, including high protein and omega-3 fatty acids [2][5]. - Fengshi Technology has achieved a "5-year 0-defect" quality gold standard from ORIVO, becoming the first and only company to do so, indicating its commitment to quality and international standards [3][5]. - The company has established a three-pronged innovation strategy: one-third from independent research and development, one-third through collaboration with marine research institutions, and one-third from overseas acquisitions [3]. Group 3: Future Directions - Fengshi Technology aims to deepen its research into the medicinal value of Antarctic krill, transitioning from food products to marine biomedicine, thereby enhancing its competitive edge in the market [4]. - The company is focused on integrating marine economy with biomedicine, contributing to the development of a new "blue quality productivity" in the industry [4].

Core Insights - The U.S. tariff revenue reached a historic high of $28 billion in July, marking a 273% increase year-over-year, with total revenue for the fiscal year reaching $142 billion [1] - The current tariff revenue accounts for 3.1% of total federal revenue, potentially rising to over 5% under existing policies, a level not seen since World War II [1] - The effective average tariff rate for U.S. consumers has hit 18.6%, the highest since 1933, leading to a projected short-term price increase of 1.8% for consumers [4] Tariff Revenue and Economic Impact - The Trump administration's "reciprocal tariff rate" could generate an additional $1.3 trillion in revenue during its term, potentially reaching $2.8 trillion by 2034 [3] - Despite the increase in tariff revenue, there are concerns about its sustainability, as rising import prices may reduce disposable income and demand for imported goods [3][6] - The increase in tariffs has led to a significant burden on consumers, with estimates suggesting a reduction in household income by approximately $2,400 annually due to rising prices [4] Consumer Price Effects - The clothing and textile sectors are particularly affected, with prices for shoes and clothing expected to rise by 39% and 37% respectively in the short term [4] - A recent survey indicated that only 25% of importers are willing to absorb tariff costs, with many manufacturers planning to pass these costs onto consumers [5] - Goldman Sachs estimates that as of June, U.S. businesses bore 64% of tariff-related price increases, but this is expected to shift, with consumers potentially bearing 67% of the costs by October [5] Fiscal Challenges - Despite the surge in tariff revenue, it remains insufficient to address the U.S. national debt, which is nearing $37 trillion [6] - The recently passed "Inflation Reduction Act" is projected to incur a cost of $3.4 trillion over the next decade, far exceeding anticipated tariff revenues [6] - The Congressional Budget Office forecasts a cumulative fiscal deficit of $21.8 trillion over the next decade, significantly overshadowing expected tariff revenue [6] Legal and Policy Challenges - The Trump administration's tariff policies are facing legal challenges, which could significantly reduce future tariff revenue and potentially require refunds of previously collected tariffs [7]