美国不会成为贸易战赢家——佐利克

　　特朗普的贸易政策如雷暴一般变动频繁，以致于公众经常无法清楚了解正在发生的事情。经过两年不断的试错，现在无论国会还是整个国家都应当回顾过去，了解贸易战的大局。特朗普的贸易政策是过去85年来的根本性转变，不仅仅是简单的谈判策略问题。特朗普是美国历史上自赫伯特·胡佛总统以来最公开地拥护贸易保护政策的总统。在他的就职演讲中，他自豪地宣称自己是一名保护主义者，我们现在都应该相信这一点，同时，也不会有人再会怀疑特朗普将自己称为“关税侠”的说法了。特朗普贸易政策的不可预测性造成了商业计划和投资的混乱。例如，在签署美加墨协定（新北美自由贸易协定）后，他因对寻求庇护的中美洲人感到愤怒，突然推翻协定、威胁对墨西哥提高关税。

　　他对贸易战的态度不会改变，就像在美墨边境修建城墙和对移民的敌意一样，是特朗普政治基础的核心问题，他必须坚持。特朗普重返保护主义产生的影响：一是美国失去了出口市场，因为它退出了跨太平洋(601099)伙伴关系等协定。TPP为其他国家降低了亚洲的贸易壁垒，但这不包括美国，因为特朗普先生退出了TPP。欧盟已经优先进入日本和其他市场。中国已将其他国家的关税降至平均6.7%。二是美国遭到了关税报复，损害了美国最具生产力的企业和农民的利益。中国对美国的平均关税提高到了21.8%。美国国会向农民发放了数百亿美元以弥补销售损失。由于供应链的转变，未来几年美国出口商也将付出代价。三是美国国内商品价格上升，特朗普的保护主义使美国企业和家庭付出了代价。美国在对自中国全部进口商品加征关税前，已经对中国15%的进口产品征税。例如，特朗普提高了铝的关税，尽管美国该行业97%的就业岗位使用铝作为投入。彼得森国际经济研究所估计，钢铁征税后，钢铁使用者要为每个增长的岗位额外支付65万美元。美国公司由于投入支付增多，一些公司将业务转移到国外以保持竞争力。两年来，总统将中国商品的平均关税提高到24%，平均增长了3%。美国人最终将以更高的价格获得这些商品。四是随着美国营商成本和不确定性的增加，美国外商直接投资下滑。这抑制了就业和工资的增长，并扰乱了全球产业链。五是美国丧失制定国际规则的权利。特朗普总统的贸易政策忽视了美国如何利用自由贸易协定来制定一些前沿领域的规则，如医疗和金融服务，知识产权，数据访问和安全。贸易协定还允许美国在反腐败法、边境规则和透明度方面做最佳示范。由于美国企业一直是创新的领导者，过去的美国谈判者一直处于国际规则制定的前沿，但特朗普对此不屑一顾，他仍坚持他的重商主义思维。 特朗普先生反驳说，这些成本是美国需要为他的交易决策付出的代价，但这些代价目前还没有获得任何回报。美韩重新谈判，减少了韩国钢铁对美出口配额，但这会伤害到美国的使用者，增加了韩国对美国汽车的进口配额，但美国汽车出口远远无法达到此配额数量，同时对卡车征收25%的关税。新的北美自由贸易协定削弱了对在墨西哥投资者的保护，让投资人感到十分紧张。这项协定因限制外国企业参与政府采购竞标而增加了政府采购成本。新的北美自由贸易协议甚至还规定了到期日以及每六年进行一次审查，增加其不确定性。对建立汽车全产业链的诉求将使北美工业在全球的竞争力下降。讽刺的是，该协议中有价值的改革来自特朗普摧毁的TPP。新北美自由贸易协定有可能不会成为一项法律，因为民主党想要改变它，但时间已经不多了。与欧盟的谈判陷入僵局。印度和美国各自都设置了贸易屏障。特朗普正在努力与日本达成一项小额协议，以恢复他因退出TPP而失去的一些机会。他已经放弃了利用中国开放需求的机会。中国的对美国的关税报复很谨慎，仅加征近三分之一的美国出口商品关税，因为中国认为提高关税会损害一个国家的全球竞争力，但特朗普不这样认为。总统的支持者已经不再去争论哪个国家会受到更多伤害，这是贸易失败的明确迹象。特朗普甚至威胁要离开WTO。里根、乔治·布什和克林顿政府为建立世界贸易组织而奋斗，包括其争端解决机制，因为他们知道美国会在公平竞争下取得成功。相比之下，特朗普总统已经阻止了世贸组织上诉机构的任命，试图在年底前将其停业。美国破坏或忽视其他国家的努力，包括中国，加强了对国有企业和发展中国家的规定。令人惊讶的是，即使有这样的失败成绩，华盛顿邮报上个月也提到了政府在贸易方面的“成功”。有什么成功？即使按照总统自己的衡量标准，美国的贸易逆差也未达预期。如果美国陷入衰退，他的政策将使经济变得更糟。国会需要保持清醒并让美国回归正轨，企业高管应该支持国会以防止贸易崩溃导致经济危机。 　　原文：

　　President Trump’s trade thunder booms so frequently thatthe public has difficulty discerning what’s really happening. After more than two years of trial and much error, Congress and the country should step back tosurvey the big picture.

　　The president’s trade policy represents a fundamental break from the past 85 years. It’s more than a matter of aggressive negotiating tactics. Not since Herbert Hoover has a U.S. president so openly embraced trade protectionism. In his inaugural address, Mr. Trump proudly proclaimed himself aprotectionist; we should now believe him. His assertion that he is a “tariff man” should convince any holdouts. The president also likes unpredictability, creating the kind of uncertainty that confuses business planning and investment. For example, after signing the U.S.- Mexico- Canada Agreement (the new North American Free Trade Agreement), he stomped on his own deal bythreatening to hike tariffs on Mexico because he was angry about Central Americans seeking asylum.

　　He will not change. Trade—like the wall with Mexico and hostility to immigration—is a core issue for the president’s political base. Hemust keep it boiling.

　　What have been the effects of Mr. Trump’s return toprotectionism?

　　First, the U.S. has lost markets for exports because it dropped out of deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The TPP lowered trade barriers in Asia for others, but not, thanks to Mr. Trump, for the U.S. The European Union has gained preferential access to Japan and other markets. China haslowered its average tariff for others to 6.7%.

　　Second, the tariffs have provoked world-wide retaliation,hurting America’s most productive businesses and farmers. For Americans, China boosted its average tariff to 21.8%. Congress now doles out tens of billions ofdollars to U.S. farmers to compensate for lost sales. U.S. exporters will pay a price for years because of supply-chain shifts.

　　Third, the president’s protectionism costs American businesses and families. The administration raised taxes on 15% of U.S. imports even before the upcoming tariff increase on almost all Chinese goods. Mr. Trumpstarted by raising tariffs on intermediate goods—on aluminum, for example, eventhough 97% of U.S. jobs in the sector use aluminum as an input. The Peterson Institute for International Economics estimated that the cost paid by steel users for each steel job gained by tariffs was about $650,000. As U.S. firms pay more for inputs, some are regretfully moving operations abroad to remain competitive. In two years, the president has increased the average tariff on Chinese goods to 24%, up from an average of 3%. Americans will end up paying these in the form of higher prices.

　　Fourth, with increased costs and uncertainties about doing business in the U.S., foreign direct investment is falling. This suppresses job and wage growth and disrupts international supply chains.

　　Fifth, President Trump’s trade policy ignores how the U.S. has used free-trade agreements to write pro-U.S. rules for cutting-edge sectors such as medical and financial services, intellectual-property rights,and data access and security. Trade agreements also allow the U.S. to establish best practices in anticorruption laws, border procedures and transparency. Because U.S. businesses have been leaders in innovation, past American negotiators have been at the forefront of international rule-making. This president disdains rules; he acts as if governments control purchases like inold-style mercantilism.

　　Mr. Trump counters that these costs are the priceAmericans must pay for his deal-making. But his record is pitiful. His administration renegotiated with South Korea, adding a steel quota that hurts U.S. users, raising a quota for U.S. autos that companies had already failed tomeet, and extending a 25% tariff on trucks. The USMCA is a mixed bag at best. It weakens protections for investors in Mexico at a time when that nation’s government is making investors nervous. The deal enfeebles pledges by governments to allow foreign companies to bid for procurement contracts, thus raising costs for government purchases. The new Nafta even has an expiration dateand is subject to review every six years—a recipe for uncertainty. The heart ofthe renegotiation is a maze of new requirements for how companies should buildautos. It will make the North American industry less competitive globally. Ironically, the agreement’s useful modernizations are drawn from the TPP, which Mr. Trump trashed. But the USMCA may never become law; Democrats in Congresswant changes and time for action is running out.

　　Negotiations with the EU are stalled. India and the U.S.have each raised barriers to one another. Mr. Trump is even struggling to strike a small deal with Japan to recover some access that he lost by droppingout of the TPP. He has passed up opportunities to capitalize on China’s need toliberalize. Chinese retaliation carefully excluded almost one-third of U.S. exports because Beijing recognizes, as Mr. Trump does not, that higher taxes oninputs hurt a nation’s global competitiveness. The president’s apologists have retreated to arguing about which country has been hurt more, a sure sign of trade defeatism.

　　Mr. Trump has even threatened to leave the World Trade Organization. The Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Clinton administrations fought to create the WTO, including its dispute-settlement procedures, because they knew Americans could compete successfully with fair, enforceable rules. The current president, by contrast, has blocked appointments to the WTO appeals body to try to put it out of business by year’s end. The U.S. sabotages orignores efforts by other countries— even China— to tighten rules on state-owned enterprises and developing countries.

　　Amazingly, even amid such a record of failure, the Washington Post last month referred to the administration’s “mixed success” on trade. What success? Even by the president’s own measure, the U.S. trade deficit, he’s losing. If the U.S. slides into recession, his policies will makeconditions worse. Congress needs to wake up and push back. Business executives should support them before the trade smashup leads to an economic breakdown.

　　Mr. Zoellick is a former World Bankpresident, U.S. trade representative and deputy secretary of state.

本文首发于微信公众号：泽平宏观。文章内容属作者个人观点，不代表和讯网立场。投资者据此操作，风险请自担。