汇丰银行-全球-宏观策略-美国贸易政策：关税评估-44-26页.pdf
需积分: 0 134 浏览量
2023-07-29
09:36:52
上传
评论
收藏 1019KB PDF 举报
Disclosures & Disclaimer
This report must be read with the disclosures and the analyst certifications in
the Disclosure appendix, and with the Disclaimer, which forms part of it.
Issuer of report: HSBC Bank plc
View HSBC Global Research at:
https://www.research.hsbc.com
The US trade policy targets rivals, friends, and WTO, seeking
to remedy unfair practices and gain leverage in talks
US remains a relatively open economy (as are its DM partners),
and the direct cost of the new tariffs so far is marginal, but rising
We address the key issues through a series of questions,
including the impacts on the US economy and businesses
Bold, risky gambit: Last year saw President Trump deliver on many of his 2016
campaign promises with respect to trade. In 2018, the US implemented five rounds of
punitive tariffs covering USD304bn of imports (12.6% of total US 2017 imports), mainly
on imports from China and on products such as steel and aluminium. Some 14.9% of
US imports are covered by special tariffs if existing punitive tariffs are also considered
(PIIE, 2019). In some cases, the US used unconventional means (ie, national security
provisions) to enact these tariffs. US partners have sought talks, litigated, and retaliated.
The US tariff actions were preceded by the president’s 2017 decision to withdraw from
the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deep and comprehensive trade deal covering much of
the Pacific Basin, though not China.
Mixed results: The US may have gained leverage in some cases from its tariff actions
(eg, in renegotiating the US-Korea bilateral accord). In other instances, the US has
incurred costs. One estimate found the US tariffs have led to efficiency losses of
USD1.4bn a month, added 1.1ppt to US domestic prices in manufacturing and
redirected some USD165bn in US trade on annual basis.
1
And while there is bipartisan
support in the US for challenging China’s “unfair” trade practices (eg, alleged abuse of
intellectual property rights), these unilateral actions have come at a cost to US soft
power. The US has foregone alliances with like-minded partners for reform at the WTO,
enforcement of WTO trade rules’ and plurilateral liberalisation in areas like services. It
has increased trade policy uncertainty.
Risks and opportunities: Aggressive interpretation of global trade rules could
encourage other economies to push boundaries as well (eg, use of national security
arguments to protect domestic industries). And ongoing tariff actions are expected to
hurt US states most reliant on these imports, such as those in Midwest and Northeast for
steel and aluminium, along with those affected by retaliatory tariffs. Uncertainty is also
likely to weigh on business activity, lessen prospects for trade liberalisation and detract
from US competitiveness. At the same time, there could be opportunities for US
businesses to replace tariffed imports with domestic products (eg, steel), or benefit from
price reductions where foreign retaliation hits US exports (eg, soybeans). New US trade
deals (eg, US-Korea, USMCA or the proposed US-Japan and US-EU deals) could also
provide some new market access opportunities.
1
M. Amiti, S. Redding, E. Weinstein, “Impact of the 2018 trade war”, CEPR, March 2019, DP 13564.
4 April 2019
Doug Lippoldt
Chief Trade Economist
HSBC Bank plc
douglas.lippoldt@hsbc.com
+44 20 7992 0375
Shanella Rajanayagam
Trade Economist
HSBC Bank plc
shanella.l.rajanayagam@hsbc.com
+44 20 3268 4118
US trade policy
Economics
Global
Taking stock of the tariffs
剩余25页未读，继续阅读
资源评论
