汪 翔

在全球经济暗流涌动的背景下，特朗普自2018年发起、并于2025年再度升级的对华贸易战，引发了激烈争论。批评者聚焦其显而易见的代价——物价上涨、供应链中断、报复性关税——却往往忽视其重塑美国经济与战略格局的潜力。这场贸易战并非完全的鲁莽之举，而是通过关税与压力，构筑了一条多维路径，旨在强化美国国力、约束企业行为、并重塑全球贸易秩序。贸易战通过间接税收缓解财政压力，抑制过度消费以减少浪费并促进健康与环保，促使美国企业重新审视海外投资，推动中国向国际规范靠拢，同时通过部分脱钩为美国科技与经济注入长期活力。这些收益，远超短期阵痛，预示着美国在全球博弈中的战略复兴。

间接征税：纾解财政赤字的利器

贸易战最直接的红利之一，是通过关税作为间接税收，为美国财政赤字提供缓冲。2020年，美国海关与边境保护局仅从进口关税中就收取了744亿美元，这笔可观收入为联邦支出提供了补充。根据税务基金会的估算，10%的普遍关税可在十年内带来约1.7万亿美元的收入，即便考虑经济减速的影响。相较于政治上敏感的直接税增收，关税为政府提供了灵活的资金来源，用于基础设施、国防或偿债，而不加重家庭负担（这个？）。2025年，美国年度赤字已逼近2万亿美元，关税收入无疑是一剂及时的止痛剂。更重要的是，关税针对进口商品，悄然激励国内生产与消费，导向经济自立的长远目标。

抑制消费：减少浪费，健康与环保双赢

通过提高进口商品价格，贸易战为美国过度消费的文化踩下刹车。来自中国的电子产品、玩具和服装——疫情期间进口激增的品类——因关税而价格攀升，促使消费者重新审视购买的必要性。2019年一项研究显示，洗衣机关税导致每台价格上涨86美元，部分家庭因此推迟购买或选择维修。这种转变虽带来不便，却减少了低端商品的快速更替，这些商品往往堆积在垃圾填埋场，加剧环境破坏。生产此类商品耗费大量资源，排放高企，关税通过压低需求，间接助力碳减排，与全球气候目标不谋而合。

此外，减少对廉价加工商品的依赖，还可能改善国民健康。快时尚与低成本电子产品催生了浪费与分心的恶性循环，挤占了健康生活方式的空间。价格上涨或将推动消费者追求“少而精”——选择耐用商品或户外活动等有益身心健康的体验。虽然关税对健康影响的直接数据尚少，但其逻辑清晰：减少无谓消费，孕育更简约、更可持续的经济模式，惠及个人与地球。

约束企业：海外投资的自我审视

贸易战的压力不仅作用于消费者，更深刻地触及美国企业，迫使它们重新评估海外投资策略。数十年来，美国企业因中国廉价劳动力和宽松法规而蜂拥而至，追求短期利润却忽视长期风险。特朗普的关税提高了从中国进口的成本，倒逼企业正视过度依赖单一供应链的脆弱性。2023年一份报告指出，针对中间产品和资本设备的关税，促使部分企业转向其他国家或回流美国本土，尽管初期成本高昂。这种“回岸”趋势增强了经济韧性。例如，一些企业开始投资美国制造业，利用关税带来的价格优势。

贸易战还催生了企业的自我约束文化。以苹果为代表的科技巨头，深陷中国生产网络，面对2025年高达120%的科技产品关税威胁，不得不加速供应链多元化。关税的阴影促使企业在全球扩张时更加审慎，平衡利润与国家利益。这种行为转变，不仅降低了对地缘政治冲击的暴露，也为美国经济安全筑起一道屏障。

施压中国：向全球规范靠拢

贸易战对中国的外部压力同样显著，有望推动其贸易与知识产权政策向国际标准靠拢。特朗普的关税直指中国的非公平做法——强制技术转让、知识产权盗窃、国有企业补贴——这些行为长期扭曲全球市场。尽管2020年第一阶段协议未实现深层改革，但迫使中国承诺增加对美进口，显示了经济压力的效力。2025年对中国商品超120%的关税升级，进一步放大这一杠杆，迫使中国直面孤立的代价。

中国虽通过开拓替代市场和扩大内需展现韧性，但其出口导向型经济——2024年对美出口高达4400亿美元——难以轻易摆脱对美国市场的依赖。关税可能促使北京放宽市场准入或强化知识产权保护，以缓解经济压力，逐步与世界贸易组织规范接轨。虽有观点认为，中国体制限制了深层改革，但持续的经济紧缩或将动摇其立场，为全球贸易公平性铺平道路。

部分脱钩：科技与经济的战略优势

贸易战最深远的意义，或许在于推动中美在科技领域的部分脱钩。自2018年以来，美国对中国半导体、信息技术硬件和消费电子的依赖大幅下降，这一趋势增强了国家安全与技术自主性。脱钩虽代价不菲，却刺激了国内芯片产业的崛起，《芯片法案》催化了数百亿美元的新工厂投资，奠定了美国科技生态的根基。

对中国而言，脱钩构成严峻挑战。关税与出口管制限制了其获取美国尖端技术的渠道，减缓了5G和人工智能等领域的步伐。首次贸易战期间，中国制造业损失350万个就业岗位，如今面临更紧张的利润空间和市场准入障碍。尽管中国通过墨西哥、越南等国转出口，但成本上升削弱了竞争力。与此同时，美国通过加强与印度和东盟的供应链合作，重塑全球布局。2015至2022年，美国对东盟的直接投资几乎是中国投资的三倍，凸显战略转向。

批评者警告，脱钩可能导致五年内1.6万亿美元的GDP损失和73.2万个就业岗位减少。然而，这些预测往往夸大短期冲击，忽视长期收益。部分脱钩通过激发美国创新、削弱中国技术优势，为美国在关键产业的主导地位铺路。贸易战的代价——物价上涨、市场波动——虽真实，却远不及重塑全球秩序的战略价值。

果断冒险，长远回报

特朗普的贸易战绝非盲目之举，而是一场果断的战略冒险，旨在为美国赢得经济与地缘政治的主动。其关税为财政注入活力，缓解赤字压力；通过抑制消费，减少浪费并促进健康与环保；迫使企业审慎投资，增强国内韧性；施压中国向国际规范靠拢，重塑贸易公平；通过部分脱钩，巩固美国科技与经济优势。物价上涨与报复性关税考验着美国民众的耐心，全球市场在不确定性中摇曳。然而，历史青睐大胆的变革。正如斯穆特-霍利关税虽有瑕疵，却促成了全球贸易的反思，特朗普的贸易战挑战了过度依赖中国的惰性。其红利——财政宽裕、消费理性、企业自律、公平贸易与美国复兴——预示着一个不再被动消费中国剩余产能，而是主动塑造自身命运的美国。

英文翻译：

In the shadow of global economic tensions, Donald Trump’s trade war with China, initiated in 2018 and reinvigorated in 2025, has sparked fierce debate. Critics decry its costs—higher prices, disrupted supply chains, and retaliatory tariffs—while overlooking its potential to reshape America’s economic and strategic landscape for the better. Far from a reckless gambit, the trade war, through its tariffs and pressures, offers a multifaceted strategy to bolster the U.S. economy, discipline corporate behavior, and recalibrate global trade dynamics. By generating revenue through indirect taxation, curbing wasteful consumption, promoting healthier and greener outcomes, forcing U.S. firms to rethink overseas investments, and compelling China to align with international norms, the trade war lays the groundwork for a more resilient America. Moreover, partial decoupling from China, while not without risks, may yield long-term technological and economic advantages that outweigh the immediate costs.

Indirect Taxation: A Path to Fiscal Relief

One of the trade war’s most immediate benefits lies in its capacity to generate revenue through tariffs, effectively acting as an indirect tax to alleviate America’s ballooning fiscal deficit. In 2020 alone, U.S. Customs and Border Protection collected $74.4 billion in tariffs on imported goods, a significant influx of revenue that could offset federal spending pressures. The Tax Foundation estimates that a 10% universal tariff could raise approximately $1.7 trillion over a decade, even accounting for economic slowdowns. While critics argue that tariffs burden consumers, this revenue stream offers a pragmatic alternative to direct tax hikes, which are politically contentious. With U.S. deficits approaching $2 trillion annually, tariff revenues provide a buffer to fund critical infrastructure, defense, or debt servicing without further straining American households. Unlike traditional taxes, tariffs target imported goods, subtly incentivizing domestic production and consumption—a strategic nudge toward economic self-reliance.

Curbing Consumption: Less Waste, Better Health, Greener Outcomes

The trade war’s tariffs, by raising the prices of imported goods, also serve as a brake on America’s culture of overconsumption. Higher prices for Chinese-made electronics, toys, and apparel—sectors where imports surged during the pandemic—encourage consumers to prioritize necessity over excess. A 2019 study noted that tariffs on washing machines led to price increases of $86 per unit, prompting some households to delay purchases or opt for repairs. This shift, while inconvenient, reduces the churn of disposable goods that clog landfills and fuel environmental degradation. The production of low-end, mass-market products—often resource-intensive and polluting—contributes significantly to global carbon emissions. By dampening demand for such items, tariffs indirectly support environmental sustainability, aligning with broader climate goals.

Moreover, reduced consumption of cheap, processed goods can yield health benefits. Fast fashion and low-cost electronics, often imported from China, perpetuate a cycle of waste and distraction, diverting resources from healthier lifestyles. Higher prices may push consumers toward quality over quantity—investing in durable goods or experiences like outdoor recreation, which promote physical and mental well-being. While data on health outcomes tied to tariffs is scarce, the principle is sound: less frivolous spending fosters a leaner, more intentional economy, with ripple effects on personal and planetary health.

Disciplining U.S. Corporations: Self-Regulation in Global Investments

The trade war’s pressures extend beyond consumers to U.S. corporations, compelling them to reassess their overseas investment strategies. For decades, American firms flocked to China for cheap labor and lax regulations, often prioritizing short-term profits over long-term stability. Trump’s tariffs, by raising the cost of importing from China, force companies to confront the risks of overreliance on foreign supply chains. A 2023 report highlighted how tariffs on intermediate inputs and capital equipment led firms to seek alternative suppliers or relocate production domestically, despite initial costs. This “reshoring” trend, while disruptive, fosters resilience. For instance, some domestically focused firms have begun investing in U.S. manufacturing, spurred by tariff-induced price advantages.

The trade war also instills a culture of self-regulation. Companies like Apple, heavily invested in Chinese production, face mounting pressures to diversify supply chains or face tariff-related losses. The threat of 60% duties on tech imports underscores the need for strategic foresight—encouraging firms to balance global ambitions with national interests. By making reckless overseas expansion less viable, the trade war nudges corporations toward investments that align with U.S. economic security, reducing vulnerability to geopolitical shocks.

Pressuring China: Toward Global Standards

Beyond domestic benefits, the trade war exerts significant pressure on China to align with global trade and intellectual property standards. Trump’s tariffs targeted China’s unfair practices—forced technology transfers, intellectual property theft, and state subsidies—that have long distorted markets. While the 2020 Phase One agreement fell short of structural reforms, it secured commitments from China to increase U.S. imports, signaling Beijing’s sensitivity to economic pressure. Continued tariffs, especially the 2025 escalation to over 120% on Chinese goods, amplify this leverage, forcing China to confront the costs of isolation.

China’s response—developing alternative markets and boosting domestic production—shows resilience but also strain. Its export-driven economy, reliant on U.S. markets ($440 billion in goods in 2024), cannot easily pivot without pain. Tariffs may push Beijing to relax market access restrictions or strengthen IP protections to avoid further losses, aligning its policies closer to World Trade Organization norms. While skeptics argue that China’s Communist Party-controlled courts limit reform, sustained economic pressure could erode resistance, fostering a fairer global trade environment.

Partial Decoupling: A Strategic Edge for U.S. Technology and Economy

Perhaps the trade war’s most profound impact lies in its push for partial decoupling from China, particularly in technology. By reducing U.S. reliance on Chinese semiconductors, IT hardware, and consumer electronics—imports of which have plummeted since 2018—the trade war bolsters national security and technological sovereignty. This decoupling, while costly, has spurred investment in domestic chip manufacturing, with the CHIPS Act catalyzing billions in new facilities. The result is a nascent but growing U.S. tech ecosystem, less vulnerable to Chinese supply chain disruptions.

For China, decoupling poses significant challenges. Tariffs and export controls have curtailed its access to advanced U.S. technologies, slowing progress in sectors like 5G and AI. Chinese firms, facing 3.5 million job losses in manufacturing during the first trade war, now grapple with tighter margins and reduced U.S. market access. While China has redirected exports through countries like Mexico and Vietnam, these workarounds inflate costs, eroding competitiveness. Meanwhile, the U.S., by diversifying supply chains to allies like India and ASEAN nations, strengthens its economic position. U.S. foreign direct investment in ASEAN nearly tripled that in China from 2015 to 2022, signaling a strategic pivot.

Critics warn of economic fallout—a potential $1.6 trillion GDP loss over five years and 732,000 fewer jobs by 2022, per one study. Yet these projections often overstate short-term pain while ignoring long-term gains. Partial decoupling, by fostering U.S. innovation and reducing China’s technological edge, positions America to lead in critical industries. The trade war’s costs—higher prices, market volatility—are real but transient compared to the strategic advantage of a rebalanced global order.

A Calculated Risk with Lasting Rewards

Trump’s trade war, far from a blunt instrument, is a calculated risk to reposition the United States for economic and strategic dominance. Its tariffs generate vital revenue, easing fiscal pressures without direct taxation. By curbing overconsumption, they promote sustainability and healthier lifestyles, reducing the environmental toll of disposable goods. U.S. corporations, once cavalier in their global ventures, now face incentives to invest thoughtfully, bolstering domestic resilience. China, under economic strain, is nudged toward fairer trade practices, while partial decoupling secures America’s technological future.

The path is not without peril. Higher prices and retaliatory tariffs test American resolve, and global markets quiver under the weight of uncertainty. Yet history rewards bold recalibrations. Just as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, flawed as it was, spurred a rethinking of global trade, Trump’s trade war challenges the complacency of a China-dependent world. Its benefits—fiscal relief, disciplined consumption, corporate accountability, and a reasserted U.S. advantage—herald a future where America stands not as a consumer of China’s surplus, but as a architect of its own destiny.