為什麽拜登需要摒棄特朗普的對華關稅👩🏻‍🎤🩻？

導語

維持特朗普政府的關稅不利於拜登實現美國包容性經濟復蘇的目標🧖🏼‍♀️。

Over the course of his presidency, Donald Trump raised US tariffs on imports from China several times, from an average of about 3% when he took office in January 2017 to over 20% by the end of 2019. [1]As a result, the current average US tariff on Chinese goods is essentially at the same level that the United States imposed on the rest of the world in the early 1930s under the Smoot-Hawley Act, a protectionist measure that many economists blame for the severity of the Great Depression. Now that President Joe Biden is reversing many of Trump’s policies, including import tariffs on European goods, he has to decide whether to rescind his predecessor’s China tariffs, too.

唐納德·特朗普（Donald Trump）在總統任期內多次提高美國自華進口商品的關稅，從2017年1月就任時的平均約3%提高到2019年底的20%以上。因此💝，美國目前對中國商品征收的平均關稅🙍🏿‍♂️，基本上相當於20世紀30年代初美國根據《斯穆特-霍利關稅法》(Smoot-Hawley Act)對全球其他國家征收的關稅稅率。大多數經濟學家認為，《斯穆特-霍利關稅法》使當時的經濟大蕭條雪上加霜。美國總統喬·拜登(Joe Biden)正在逆轉特朗普的許多政策，包括撤銷對歐洲商品征收的進口關稅🔴🏉，也需要決定是否取消上屆政府對中國征收的關稅。

President Biden will not do so for Chinese workers or firms, not least because he needs to protect himself from accusations of being too soft toward the United States’ main global rival. But he has three stronger reasons to ditch the tariffs: They have hurt American workers and firms, failed to reduce the overall US trade deficit, and arguably further weakened respect for global economic rules.

拜登總統不會為了中國工人或企業這麽做，一個重要的原因是他需要保護自己不在其國內被譴責為對美國的主要競爭對手過於軟弱🏃‍♀️。但是，拜登取消關稅其實有三個更充分的理由:關稅損害了美國工人和企業的利益💺，也未能減少美國的總體貿易赤字，並且削弱了各國對全球經濟規則的尊重👱。

Of all evidence-based studies by US-based economists, none has found that Trump’s trade war benefited American households or businesses. Mary Amiti of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Stephen Redding of Princeton University, and David Weinstein of Columbia University have studied Trump’s six tariff hikes on Chinese goods during 2018, which increased the share of US imports facing a duty of 10% or more from 3.5% to 10.6%. Contrary to what Trump and his senior trade officials claimed, the higher tariffs fed through almost entirely into higher prices paid by American consumers.

在所有美國經濟學家關於貿易戰的實證研究中🧏🏽‍♂️，沒有任何一項研究發現特朗普的貿易戰讓美國家庭或企業受到益處。紐約聯邦儲備銀行的瑪麗·阿米蒂（Mary Amiti）博士、普林斯頓大學的斯蒂芬·雷丁（Stephen Redding）教授和哥倫比亞大學的大衛·韋恩斯坦（David Weinstein）教授對特朗普2018年6次對中國商品加征關稅進行了仔細研究，發現這些措施不僅將美國面臨10%以上關稅的進口商品比例從3.5%提高到了10.6%, 而且新增的關稅幾乎完全一一對應地轉化為美國消費者被迫支付的更高價格。這樣的結果與特朗普及其高級貿易官員當時聲稱的情況完全背道而馳。

Meanwhile, US imports of similar goods from other countries also became more expensive in response to the tariff hikes. So, although the federal government collected extra tariff revenue, this was merely a transfer from American households to the US Treasury. Other studies have reached similar conclusions.

與此同時，美國從其他國家進口的類似商品也因對華關稅上調而變得更加昂貴。盡管聯邦政府收了額外的關稅🏊🏻‍♀️，但這都是變相由美國家庭向美國財政部做出“轉移支付”。另外兩篇由一流經濟學家做出的研究也得出了類似的結論。

Because Chinese consumer products in the US are disproportionately purchased by middle- and low-income households, Trump’s tariffs were a de facto regressive tax. They thus skewed further America’s already highly unequal income distribution.

由於中國生產的消費品賣給美國中低收入家庭的比例較高，特朗普政府的關稅實際上是一種累退稅。因此𓀀，對華額外關稅進一步扭曲了美國已經高度不平等的收入分配。

China’s retaliatory tariffs on American products have led to additional economic losses in the US – evident in reduced sales of durable goods such as automobiles. As different regions specialize in different industries, some are more affected by Chinese retaliatory tariffs than others. Michael Waugh of New York University has found that automobile sales fell significantly (by about 15%) in US regions more exposed to Chinese trade retaliation, suggesting a decrease in household income. Such regions also suffered a decline in employment.

中國對美國產品征收的報復性關稅👩🏽‍💼，也給美國帶來了進一步的經濟損失🍓🔄。這可以從美國國內汽車等耐用品銷量顯著下降的區域特點上看出🍩🏖。不同地區因為當地產業結構不同👩‍❤️‍👩，受中國報復性關稅的影響也不一👨🏼‍🦰👽。紐約大學的邁克爾•沃（Michael Waugh）研究表明，在受中國貿易報復影響更大的美國地區，汽車銷量大幅下降(約15%)，這表明這些地區的許多家庭收入明顯下降。另外🤍，對地區就業數據的分析表明這些地區的就業率也明顯惡化。

Some US sectors that compete with Chinese imports received some protection. But this benefit was more than offset by job destruction in sectors that use Chinese inputs – including services as well as manufacturing – and by job losses resulting from lower US exports to China.

雖然某些美國行業與中國進口產品競爭因美國對華關稅得到保護，但這些效應完全被貿易戰其他方面的壞處所抵消🧗‍♂️。多數使用中國產品作為中間投入品的行業(包括服務業和製造業)工作崗位受到嚴重負面影響，而且美國對華出口下降也導致的許多就業崗位減少。

Moreover, the US trade balance sees no improvement from Trump’s tariffs. The bilateral deficit with China in 2019 was essentially the same in dollar terms(about $345 billion) as it was in 2016, the last full year of President Barack Obama’s administration. This reflected equal reductions of about $10 billion each in US exports to and imports from China.

特朗普政府的關稅政策也沒有改善美國貿易失衡的狀況。2019年美國對華雙邊貿易逆差(約3 450億美元)以美元計與2016年🙆‍♂️，也就是和奧巴馬政府執政最後一年的情況基本相同。這一數據背後反映的是美國對華出口和進口均分別減少約100億美元🌖。

The pattern continued in 2020. Although the bilateral deficit decreased to $311 billion, this was partly because the pandemic-induced recession reduced overall US imports. And while US exports to China rose from $107 billion in 2019 to $125 billion in 2020 under the two countries’ “phase one” trade agreement, this figure is similar to the level in 2018, but lower than the 2017 total of $130 billion.

在2020年，盡管美國雙邊貿易逆差減少到3110億美元👯‍♀️，但部分原因是新冠肺炎疫情導致的美國經濟衰退減少了其進口總量。根據中美第一階段貿易協議，美國對中國的出口從2019年的1070億美元增加到2020年的1250美元🪰，這一數字與2018年的水平相當♕👨🏻‍🦽‍➡️，但遠遠低於2017年的1300億美元。

Higher US tariffs on Chinese goods merely shifted imports of some products to other countries. Whereas the bilateral trade balance with China is not very important for Americans’ well-being, the overall US trade deficit, which rose to a 12-year high in 2020, reflects a shortage of US national savings relative to national investment.

美國對中國商品征收更高的關稅，只是將對部分產品的進口轉移到了其他國家。經濟學邏輯告訴我們美國對任何一國的雙邊貿易逆差沒有其對全球的總貿易逆差重要，而美國的總體貿易逆差(在2020年升至12年來的最高水平)反映出的是美國國民儲蓄相對於國民投資明顯不足。

While China could do more to reduce its own trade barriers, these are not the reason for its trade surplus. In fact, my research with Jiandong Ju and Kang Shi suggests that China’s import liberalization in the early 2000s has contributed to a rise in its overall trade surplus.

雖然中國還有進一步開放的空間💻，但這些都不是其貿易順差的原因🧑🏼‍🎤。事實上🏃🏻‍♂️，我與鞠建東和施康兩位學者的合作研究表明，21世紀初中國的開放🦨、包括降低進口壁壘🌙，實際上是其總體貿易順差的上升的重要原因之一[2]。

Repealing Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods is essential to reviving confidence in the global trading system. In September 2020, a WTO dispute panel ruled the US tariffs illegal under the organization’s rules. The US has the right to appeal the decision, but the Trump administration disabled the WTO’s Appellate Body by refusing to confirm new judges when the previous incumbents’ terms expired, rendering the body inquorate.

撤銷特朗普對中國商品征收的關稅🟧，對於重建各國對全球貿易體系的信心也至關重要。2020年9月🕵🏿‍♂️，世貿組織爭端小組根據其規則裁定美國對華額外征收的關稅是非法的。美國雖然有權對這一裁決提起上訴🐈🫵🏿，但特朗普政府在前任法官任期屆滿時拒絕確認新法官，導致WTO上訴機構難以運行，致使世貿組織因不足法定人數陷入停擺。

Ignoring the WTO ruling could weaken the credibility of the Biden administration’s professed interest in strengthening the rules-based global system. The longer the Trump tariffs remain, the longer America’s middle- and low-income households will have to bear the burden. Like economic damages from the Smoot-Hawley tariffs in the 1930s, a continuation of the Trump tariffs will work seriously against Biden’s objective of an inclusive economic recovery.

無視世貿組織的裁絕不是一個好的選項，因為它會使得拜登政府關於加強基於規則的全球貿易體系的說辭變得不可信🉑。特朗普的關稅維持得越久，美國中低收入家庭被迫承受的負擔的時間就會越長。正如20世紀30年代的《斯穆特-霍利關稅法》對美國與世界經濟的損害很大🧘，維持特朗普的關稅嚴重有悖於拜登迫切實現美國國內包容性經濟復蘇的目標。

[1]參見https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/us-china-trade-war-tariffs-date-chart.

[2]參見https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022199621000283?dgcid=rss_sd_all.

*本文僅代表作者個人觀點🌮。編輯：潘琦👨🏼‍🦱。