Core Viewpoint - The U.S. International Trade Court has blocked President Trump's tariff policy, ruling that the president overstepped his authority by imposing tariffs on countries with trade surpluses with the U.S. [2][4] Group 1: Court Ruling and Implications - The court's 49-page ruling prohibits the Trump administration from enforcing tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), stating that the Act does not grant the president the authority to issue global tariffs or retaliatory tariffs [4][5] - The ruling halts the implementation of a 10% universal tariff on most U.S. imports and certain tariffs on China, Mexico, and Canada, but does not affect the 25% tariffs on the automotive and steel industries [4][6] - This ruling is considered one of the most significant judicial setbacks for the Trump administration, effectively nullifying the legal basis for the tariff strategy during his second term [6][7] Group 2: Future Trade Negotiations - The ruling complicates ongoing trade negotiations with approximately 18 countries, as the Trump administration has relied on the "reciprocal tariffs" as leverage [6][7] - Experts believe that the court's decision may lead trade partners to halt further concessions until there is a clearer legal framework from the U.S. judicial system regarding tariff disputes [7][8] Group 3: Potential Outcomes and Strategies - If the Trump administration's appeal is unsuccessful, it could significantly undermine the strategy of using high tariffs to compel trade partners to make concessions and reduce the trade deficit [8][9] - Analysts suggest that the administration may seek alternative legal avenues to impose tariffs, potentially using different legal justifications to circumvent the court's ruling [9]

Core Points - The U.S. President has postponed the planned 50% tariffs on EU products from June 1 to July 9 to allow for negotiations [1][2] - The U.S. originally intended to impose a 20% "reciprocal tariff" on EU imports, but has retained a 10% "baseline tariff" [2][4] - The EU has expressed that the U.S. government's aggressive stance is unacceptable and emphasized the need to maintain their position without escalating the dispute [4][12] Group 1 - The U.S. government's recent threats and subsequent postponement reflect the uncertainty in its tariff policy, which is seen as a negotiation tactic [7][9] - Experts warn that imposing high tariffs could lead to an economic recession in the U.S., with potential impacts on GDP and inflation [9][11] - The current tariffs on EU products include a 10% baseline tariff and a 25% tariff on automobiles and steel, which are already significant burdens [11][12] Group 2 - The EU is committed to reaching an agreement with the U.S. before the July 9 deadline [13] - The EU has stated that it will not concede on key issues and is open to cooperation only if the U.S. is willing to negotiate fairly [17]

Core Viewpoint - The recent shift in President Trump's stance on tariffs against the EU indicates a desire to maintain negotiation space and avoid escalating trade tensions, despite ongoing deep-seated economic relationship restructuring between the US and EU [2][3]. Group 1: Tariff Negotiations - Trump initially threatened to impose a 50% tariff on EU imports starting June 1, citing a lack of progress in negotiations [3]. - Following a conversation with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Trump agreed to extend the deadline for imposing tariffs to July 9, suggesting a willingness to continue discussions [3][4]. - The EU's strategy involves a dual approach: proposing conditions for tariff reductions while also demonstrating a strong stance to wait for potential shifts in the US position [4]. Group 2: Economic Impact and Market Reactions - The capital markets reacted positively to the tariff delay, with US stock index futures rising and the euro appreciating against the dollar [5]. - Despite the positive market response, analysts express concerns that the ongoing tariff threats could lead to a prolonged period of uncertainty in US-EU trade relations [5][6]. Group 3: Long-term Implications - The trade dispute reflects a broader trend of distancing between the US and EU, with both sides recognizing that a trade war would be detrimental [8][9]. - Analysts suggest that the traditional "value-based alliance" between the US and EU is evolving into a more loose-knit alliance focused on mutual interests rather than shared values [9].

Group 1: Silver Market Analysis - London silver is currently trading above $33.54, with an opening price of $33.03 per ounce and a current price of $33.48, reflecting a 1.33% increase [1] - The highest price reached today was $33.54, while the lowest was $32.88, indicating a short-term bullish trend in the silver market [1] - The trading range for platinum metal over the past month has been between $31.65 and $33.70, with recent price movements showing uncertainty as it fluctuates around the 20-period exponential moving average [3] Group 2: EU-US Trade Negotiations - EU and US tariff negotiations have resumed but remain fraught with uncertainty, with the EU willing to make concessions on purchasing US natural gas, weapons, and agricultural products, while rejecting US demands to eliminate VAT and weaken digital regulations [2] - The US continues to impose a 25% tariff on EU steel and aluminum products and maintains a 10% baseline tariff on nearly all other goods, threatening additional tariffs on pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and other key sectors [2] - The EU has initiated public consultations on a list of nearly €100 billion worth of goods in response to US tariffs and plans to file a complaint with the WTO regarding US tariffs on cars and parts [2]

Group 1 - China has not imported US LNG for nearly two and a half months since imposing a 15% retaliatory tariff in February, with imports dropping from 65,700 tons in February to zero in March compared to 412,500 tons last year [1][3] - The Chinese government is diversifying its natural gas supply channels and is not solely reliant on the US, focusing on increasing domestic production and utilizing cheaper alternatives such as coal and renewable energy [3][5] - The trade tensions have led to Canada imposing high tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and steel products, prompting China to retaliate with tariffs on Canadian agricultural products [5][6] Group 2 - There is a call from various sectors in Canada for a pragmatic cooperation with China, suggesting a need to reassess past policies towards China to improve bilateral relations [7] - The Chinese ambassador to Canada emphasized the strong complementary nature of economic relations between China and Canada, particularly in the energy sector [6][7]

Export Performance - In April, exports increased by 8.1% year-on-year, a 2.4 percentage point rise from March, driven by a second wave of export rush[3] - The strong export performance exceeded previous expectations of 5.7%, highlighting significant export momentum[3] - The trade surplus for April narrowed slightly to $96.18 billion, but remained at a high level[3] Import Trends - April imports saw a reduced decline of 0.2%, a 4.1 percentage point improvement from March[4] - The rebound in imports indicates stable overall domestic demand growth[5] - Key categories such as energy imports showed signs of recovery, contributing to the overall import performance[5] Trade Relations and Tariff Impact - The U.S. has begun to ease its tariff stance, which is expected to support continued export growth into the second quarter[6] - Exports to ASEAN countries rose significantly by 15.9 percentage points to 20.8%, while exports to the U.S. fell sharply by 21.0%[4] - The ongoing trade negotiations between China and the U.S. may further influence export dynamics in the coming months[6] Sector-Specific Insights - The semiconductor and electronics sectors contributed positively to total exports, adding 0.4 percentage points to the year-on-year growth[5] - Automotive and steel products, which had previously faced tariffs, have seen adjustments in export destinations, enhancing their contribution to overall export growth[5] - Mid-range consumer goods experienced a short-term decline in exports due to tariff impacts, but are expected to recover gradually[5] Economic Outlook - The risk of export decline remains in the second half of the year due to ongoing uncertainties in global trade policies[7] - The Chinese economy's resilience will depend on stabilizing real estate market expectations and boosting consumer demand[6] - Monetary and fiscal policies are being adjusted to support economic stability amid complex international conditions[6]

据新民晚报报道，在关税问题上，日美依然没有谈拢。日本首相石破茂日前就日美关税谈判问题表示，两国之间立场存在隔阂，目前尚未找到共识。近日， 石破茂听取了第二轮日美关税谈判汇报。针对美国3日开始对关键汽车零部件加征25%关税一事，石破茂表示"非常遗憾"，并称将继续要求美国重新审视相 关关税措施。身为美国在亚太地区的重要盟友，日本获得了对美关税优先谈判权。然而两轮谈判下来，美国仍旧毫不退让。 日本首相石破茂（资料图） 通过日本与美国的谈判来看，中国不与美国谈判，就已经表明了中国是非常了解美国的。从美国给出的谈判条件来看，根本看不到诚意，这样的谈判怎么可 能有结果！而对于日本来说，无论是汽车还是钢铝，均是其重要的出口，日本的谈判也更多的是在这些方面取得进展，但是美国直接表明不愿意降低相应的 关税，谈不拢也是很正常的！ 日本也是赶上了中国崛起的战略红利。美日贸易谈判的破裂，对美国而言，是一记重创。因为在中美谈判迟迟无法重启的时候，美日贸易谈判就是美国关税 战的头等大事了。中国、欧盟、加拿大，都拒绝屈服了。现在日本也拒绝屈服，再这么拖下去，特朗普的关税战，有全面崩盘的风险。为什么特朗普越来越 着急，反倒主动求和中国？根源 ...

Group 1 - The article discusses the ongoing trade tensions between the US and China, highlighting that China has not responded to US negotiation hints, suggesting a potential breakdown in discussions over tariffs [1][3] - Recent statements from China's Ministry of Commerce indicate a possible shift in tone, with the ministry acknowledging that the US has been reaching out for talks, which may signal a willingness to engage under certain conditions [3][5] - The article emphasizes that for any dialogue to be meaningful, the US must demonstrate genuine goodwill by correcting its unilateral tariff measures, as China is firm on its stance of "fighting back if necessary" while keeping the door open for negotiations [5][7] Group 2 - Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has taken a strong stance against US tariffs, indicating that Japan will not compromise its national interests for a quick resolution, reflecting a newfound confidence possibly influenced by China's assertiveness [7][9] - Japan holds a significant amount of US Treasury bonds, which could serve as leverage in trade negotiations, with officials suggesting that these bonds are not merely for supporting the US but could be used strategically [9][10] - The article suggests that both China and Japan, as major holders of US debt, may collaborate to counter US pressure, potentially leading to a more cautious approach from the US in its trade policies [9][10]

Core Viewpoint - The article analyzes the implications of Trump's tariff war on the global economy, particularly focusing on the strategies and responses of various economic entities, including China, Canada, and Mexico, as well as the broader international context [2][4]. Group 1: Trump's Psychological Bottom Line - Trump's key demands in the tariff negotiations include a 10% baseline tariff on global imports, protective tariffs on key industries like automobiles, and specific measures targeting China, Canada, and Mexico [5][6][8]. - The 10% baseline tariff is seen as a potential concession point for Trump, aimed at preventing trade loopholes and increasing fiscal revenue [6]. - Protective tariffs on industries such as steel, aluminum, and automobiles are intended to limit competition and protect American jobs, with tariffs already set at 25% for steel and aluminum [7]. Group 2: Trump's Game Strategy - The U.S. holds a strategic advantage in the tariff war due to its position as the largest global demand-side economy, allowing it to dictate terms to other economies [10]. - Trump's unpredictable behavior in tariff announcements serves to increase the decision-making costs for opponents, maintaining strategic flexibility [11]. - The U.S. is shifting from multilateral frameworks like the WTO to bilateral negotiations, using tariffs as leverage to reshape trade relationships [10]. Group 3: China's Response - China has demonstrated a strong and rapid response to U.S. tariffs, indicating both the necessity and capability to counteract U.S. measures [15][16]. - The trade conflict is characterized as a repeated prisoner's dilemma, where mutual cooperation is beneficial, but unilateral concessions would disadvantage China [15]. - China's economic resilience and strategic reforms are expected to mitigate the impacts of the tariff war, with a focus on expanding domestic demand and technological self-sufficiency [18]. Group 4: Responses from Other Economies - Canada has taken a firm stance against U.S. tariffs, leveraging its economic ties with the U.S. to push back effectively, while Mexico has shown a more passive response due to its dependency on the U.S. [22][23]. - Other economies like the EU, Japan, and India have exhibited a tendency to negotiate rather than retaliate, reflecting their reliance on the U.S. and a lack of unified response strategies [25][26]. - The EU's delayed response to U.S. tariffs highlights internal divisions and a lack of cohesive strategy compared to China's swift actions [26].

Group 1 - Canada has reached a significant oil trade agreement with China, with imports hitting a historical peak of 7.3 million barrels in March 2023, marking a 90% reduction in U.S. oil imports due to trade tensions [3][5] - The diversification of energy imports is crucial for China to ensure energy security and mitigate trade risks, while Canada benefits from expanding its overseas market and boosting economic gains through increased oil exports [3][5] - The Canadian government, under Prime Minister Mark Carney, has adopted a hardline stance against China, imposing high tariffs on various Chinese products, which disrupts normal international trade and harms both Canadian and Chinese businesses [5][9] Group 2 - Canada has also taken a strong position against the U.S., maintaining retaliatory tariffs in response to unfavorable trade policies, which has negatively impacted Canadian industries [8][9] - The Canadian economy is heavily reliant on the U.S. market, with 75% of exports directed there; continued deterioration in U.S.-Canada trade relations could lead to a projected 18% drop in GDP within six months [9] - The trade relationship with China is vital, as the trade volume exceeded $100 billion in 2023; poor policies towards China could result in significant losses for Canadian industries, as evidenced by tariffs on Canadian canola oil and peas [9]