中美貿易的十個真相

特朗普政府正在與全世界打貿易戰。許多人認爲，特朗普及其貿易政策團隊是一批極端貿易保護主義者，他們身處21世紀，但思維仍停留在19世紀。在過時貿易理念的驅使下，他們過份強調貿易的不平衡，與全世界各主要貿易伙伴大打貿易戰，搞亂了全球貿易秩序。

The Trump administration is engaged in a trade war with the whole world. Many people think that Trump and his trade policy team are a group of extreme trade protectionists whose bodies have entered the 21st century, but whose thoughts are still in the 19th century. Driven by outdated trade concepts, they over-emphasize trade imbalances and launch trade wars with major trading partners around the world, bringing chaos to the global trade order.

特朗普政府指責中國採取不公平貿易政策，指控中國佔美國的便宜，迫使美國公司向本國企業轉讓技術，剽竊美國的知識產權，並懷疑在美留學的中國學生和學者收集技術情報。這些毫無根據的看法正在妖魔化中國，煽動美國公衆對中國的負面情緒，從而加深了兩國人民之間的敵意。

The Trump administration accuses China of unfair trade policies. China is accused of taking advantage of the US, forcing US companies to transfer technology to local companies, stealing US intellectual property rights, and Chinese students and scholars studying in the US are supposedly collectors of technical intelligence. These unfounded views are deMonizing China, fanning the negative sentiment of China amongst the American public, and as a result, deepening the hostility between the two peoples.

我認爲現在的當務之急是讓兩國人民，尤其是美國人民瞭解中美貿易的真相。

I believe that what is urgent now is to let the people of both countries, especially the United States, understand the truth about China-US trade.

首先，中美貿易是自由和公平的。雖然作爲一個發展中國家，中國的關稅高於美國，但它的關稅低於許多發展中國家，包括印度。中國並沒有強迫人們購買中國產品，美國進口商也並不愚蠢。中國的進口產品有助於多年來收入增長緩慢的美國中產階級，使他們以同樣收入買到更多商品。2017年中國出口的增長，恰恰是美國經濟增長強勁和消費者信心增加的結果。

First of all, China-US trade is free and fair. Although China as a developing country has higher tariffs than the US, it has lower tariffs than many developing countries, including India. China is not forcing people to buy from it, and US importers are not stupid. China's imports have helped the US middle class, which have experienced slow income growth for years, to buy more goods with the same income. The increase in Chinese exports in 2017 is precisely the result of strong US growth and increased consumer confidence.

第二，2001年加入WTO後，中國市場基本上是開放的。中國是美國出口增長最快的市場，如果中國市場不開放，就不可能有56％的美國大豆、26％的波音飛機和16％的美國汽車出口到中國。

Second, China's market is basically open after its accession to the WTO in 2001. China is the fastest growing market for US exports. If the Chinese market is not open, it is impossible to see 56% of US soybean exports, 26% of Boeing aircraft, and 16% of US automobiles exported to China.

第三，美國的出口管制是增加對華出口的障礙。與其他一些發展中國家一樣，中國的比較優勢是勞動力成本較低，而美國的比較優勢在於資本、技術和土地。在這種差異的推動下，中國向美國出口勞動密集型產品，美國則向中國出口技術產品和農產品。正如美國中國商會所抱怨的，美國的出口管制政策比歐洲（特別是德國）和日本更嚴格，它限制了美國的對華出口。美國的出口管制對貿易逆差也應該負有一定責任。

Third, US export controls are a barrier to more exports to China. Like some other developing countries, China's comparative advantage lies in cheaper labor. America's comparative advantage lies in capital, technology, and land. Driven by this difference, China exports labor-intensive products to America, and the US exports technology products and agricultural products to China. As the US Chamber of Commerce in China complains, the US export control policies are stricter than those of Europe (especially Germany) and Japan, limiting US exports to China. US export controls should take part of the responsibility for the trade deficit.

第四，美中貿易是全球供應鏈的組成部分。雖然全球化給各國帶來了財富和增長，但它並沒有改變富國和窮國之間的分工。實際上，美國處於供應鏈的高端，而中國處於供應鏈的低端。蘋果手機就是最典型的例子。幾乎所有蘋果手機都在中國組裝，但中國工人和工廠只獲得5％的附加值（主要是勞動力成本），而蘋果的設計、品牌和銷售拿走附加值的近60％，蘋果的美國投資者分享了這些利潤。然而，作爲蘋果手機組裝的最後一環，中國必須承擔蘋果公司出口到美國的全部價值。不同的經濟學家認爲，全球供應鏈把中國對美國的出口誇大了40%到60%。

Fourth, US-China trade takes place within the global supply chain. While globalization has brought wealth and growth to countries, it has not changed the division of labor between the rich and the poor nations. In reality, the US is at the high end of the supply chain, while China is at the low end of the supply chain. Apple's iPhone is the most typical example. Almost all iPhones are assembled in China, but Chinese workers and factories only receive 5% value added (mainly labor costs), and Apple's design, branding, and sales account for nearly 60% of the value added, and American investors from Apple share these profits. However, as the final assembly point of the iPhone, China has to bear the entire value of all Apple exports to the US. The global supply chain exaggerates China's exports to the United States by as much as 40-60%, according to different economists.

第五，特朗普和其他保護主義者只強調中美商品貿易逆差，而故意忽視美國在服務貿易中對中國的順差。例如，據中國的統計，2017年美國對華服務貿易順差高達541億美元，如果採用美國標準，2017年美國對華服務貿易順差總額超過900億美元。美國從中國遊客和學生，以及從對中國的出口版權和專利那裏獲得了大量好處。

Fifth, Trump and other protectionists only emphasize the Sino-US trade deficit in goods, but they deliberately ignore the US surplus with China in service trade. For example, according to Chinese statistics, the US service trade surplus with China in 2017 was as high as $54.1 billion; if the US standard applies, the total US service trade surplus with China in 2017 would exceed $90 billion. The US has gained a lot of benefits from Chinese tourists and students, and from exporting copyrights and patents to China.

第六，貿易保護主義者故意忽視的另一點是，在華投資的美國公司銷售額已超過5000億美元。它們不僅從快速增長的中國市場獲取鉅額利潤，還導致美國零部件以及知識產權出口到中國，這反過來也促進了美國經濟的增長。

Sixth, another thing trade protectionists deliberately ignore is that the sales of US companies investing in China have surpassed $500 billion. They not only make huge profits from the fast-growing Chinese market, they also lead to the export of US parts and components as well as intellectual property rights to China, which in turn promotes growth in the US economy.

第七，最新數據反駁了對中國所謂“盜竊知識產權”的指責。雖然知識產權制度起步較晚（始於上世紀90年代初），但中國已經建立了相對完整的知識產權法律保護制度，包括設立知識產權法院和專門的司法機構，對知識產權的保護明顯已經生效。例如，2017年中國對外支付知識產權費用達到286億美元，比2001年加入WTO的時候增加了15倍。而美國知識產權所有者是最大的受益人。

Seventh, the latest data refutes the accusations about China's so-called “theft of intellectual property rights”. Although the system of intellectual property rights started late (since the early 1990s), China has established a relatively complete intellectual property legal protection system, including the establishment of intellectual property courts and specialized judicial institutions, and the protection of IP rights has clearly taken effect. For example, in 2017, China's external payment of intellectual property fees reached $28.6 billion, a 15-fold increase over the time when it joined the WTO in 2001. US intellectual property owners are the biggest beneficiaries.

第八，至於所謂中國“強制技術轉讓”問題，並沒有證據表明中國政府有法律或法規對外國投資企業實施這一要求，中國也沒有對美國企業強制執行技術轉讓。美國汽車業在中國市場的巨大成功表明，中美合資企業的主要基礎是自願的契約行爲。通用汽車和福特通過合資企業向中國出口了大量汽車和零部件，已經成爲中國最大的汽車製造商之一。

Eighth, as for the so-called "forced technology transfer" problem in China, there is no evidence that the Chinese government has a law or regulation that imposes this requirement on foreign-invested enterprises, and there is no enforcement of the transfer of technology on US companies. The great success of the US auto industry in the Chinese market indicates that China-US joint ventures are mainly based on voluntary contractual behavior. General Motor and Ford have exported a large number of automobiles and parts to China through joint ventures, becoming one of the largest automobile manufacturers in China.

第九，“中國製造2025”產業政策是特朗普政府攻擊中國的主要目標之一。顯然，他擔心中國會採取所謂“國家資本主義”政策，通過國家補貼提高中國企業在高科技產業的競爭力。這種指責是毫無根據的，原因是：首先，利用產業政策升級中國企業技術是中國的發展權，符合WTO規則。其次，中國的政策只是指導性的，不是強制性的。第三，中國的產業升級是必要的，因爲隨着勞動力成本的上升，中國的勞動力競爭優勢大多已經喪失，中國經濟增長面臨着巨大困難。此外，美國自己在農業和製造業領域存在大量補貼，最近濫用301條款和232條款（以國家安全爲名）就是美國版國家保護主義的一個例子。

Ninth, the industrial policy “Made in China 2025” is one of the main goals of the Trump administration's attack on China. Obviously, he is worried that China will adopt the so-called “state capitalism” policy and enhance the competitiveness of Chinese enterprises in the high-tech industry through state subsidies. This accusation is unfounded, because of the following factors: the use of industrial policies to upgrade the technology of Chinese enterprises is China's development right and is in line with WTO regulations. Second, China's policies are only guidelines, they're not mandatory. Third, China's industrial upgrade is necessary because, with the rise of labor costs, China's labor competitive advantage is mostly lost, and China's economic growth is facing enormous difficulties. In addition, the United States itself has a large number of subsidies in agriculture and manufacturing. The recent abuse of Section 301 and Section 232 provisions (in name of national security) is an example of the US version of state protectionism.

第十，中國的貿易行爲沒有違反WTO規則。自16年前加入WTO以來，中國總的來說遵守了入世議定書中的所有義務，這是WTO對中國表現的評價。作爲兩個貿易大國，中國和美國都接受兩年一次的貿易政策審議。在WTO爭端解決機制裁定中國政策不符合WTO規則的案子裏，中國都進行了糾正，相反美國卻很少服從WTO的裁決。

Tenth, China's trade practices have not violated WTO rules. Since China joined the WTO 16 years ago, the country has, generally speaking, complied with all its obligations in its accession protocol. This is the WTO's evaluation of China's performance. As two major trading nations, China and the US have been subject to a biennial trade policy review. And in the cases where the WTO dispute settlement mechanism ruled that China's policy does not conform to WTO rules, China has corrected it; by contrast, the United States obeys WTO judgments far less often.

總之，中國不想打貿易戰，希望與美國發展穩定、互利、公平的貿易關係。特朗普發起有史以來針對中國的最大貿易戰，對價值500億美元中國出口產品徵收關稅，現在還威脅對另外2000億美元甚至5000億美元中國產品徵收關稅。顯然，特朗普的貿易戰是典型的貿易欺凌，中國政府被迫堅決反擊。與此同時，中國正在加快市場導向的改革，向外國投資者開放市場，以應對貿易戰的挑戰。中國已經有最大的國內銷售市場，並且正在進一步開放其市場，如果特朗普政府堅持與中國打貿易戰，那麼美國有可能把機會錯失給其他競爭對手。而且，貿易戰的升級讓人回想起上世紀30年代的歷史悲劇，當時美國國會通過了高關稅的貿易保護法，即1930年斯莫特-霍利關稅法，結果導致全球範圍的貿易戰、貨幣戰，直至爆發毀滅性的第二次世界大戰。聰明的美國人民應該更加了解這段歷史所產生的後果，反對貿易戰政策。

In sum, China does not want to fight a trade war and hopes to develop stable, mutually beneficial, and fair trade relations with the United States. Trump launched the largest trade war in history against China, slapping tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese exports, and now threatens to levy tariffs on an additional $200 billion or even $500 billion. Obviously, Trump's trade war is typical trade bullying, and the Chinese government is forced to resolutely fight back. At the same time, China is accelerating market-oriented reforms and opening up the market to foreign investors as a counterbalance to trade war challenges. Given the fact that China is already the largest domestic sales market and is further opening up its market, the US may lose opportunities to other competitors if the Trump administration insists on a trade war with China. Moreover, the escalation of trade war recalls the tragic history of the 1930s, when the US Congress passed the high tariff trade protection law, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930. The result was a world-wide trade war, a currency war, and finally the totally destructive World War II. The wise American people should be more aware of the results of this period of history and oppose the policy of trade war.