On March 5, the United States announced that it would impose import tariffs of up to 30% on some steel imports to help the depressed domestic steel industry. The new tax scope includes 10 product categories, and the tax amount ranges from 8% to 30%. The collection began on March 20th, and the products collected covered rolled steel plates and other steel products imported from Brazil, Korea, Japan, Taiwan Province Province, Russia, Germany, Turkey, France, China, Australia and the Netherlands. The tax payment period is three years, and the 30% tax levied on steel plates will be reduced to 24% in the second year and to 18% in the third year. Steel plate imports account for about 60% of American steel imports. Moreover, Bush's tax plan this time has been carefully designed and adopted a "differential treatment" approach, excluding Canada and Mexico, two members of the North American Free Trade Area. Turkey, an important ally in the war on terrorism, also enjoys tax-free treatment, while Russia, another country that has made important contributions in the war on terrorism, has also received preferential quotas. The EU, Japan, China and South Korea will be the hardest hit areas for this decision. The American steel industry welcomed the Bush administration's decision as a necessary measure to save the industry, but foreign steel producers lashed out at the decision, calling it protectionism and a blow to free trade. The decision of the United States immediately aroused strong opposition around the world, and an international steel trade war is coming.

1. There are reasons why the United States decided to raise tariffs on imported steel products:

1. Due to the economic slowdown and declining demand, the global steel industry had a serious overcapacity last year.

Major steel-producing countries predict that by 2005, factories with steel production capacity of 1.65 and 43.8+0.75 billion tons will be permanently closed due to excess steel. In order to avoid continuing to increase inventories, the global steel production will be reduced by more than 200 million tons. Bush administration officials said that import restrictions will ensure that the US steel industry will not pay more for global steel production reduction, including closing factories.

2. Pressure from within the American steel industry.

Bush announced on the same day that his decision was to save the troubled American steel industry. However, the downturn of American steel industry is not the price shock of imported steel. Foreign manufacturers retort that the current problems encountered by the American steel industry are caused by the industry's inability to reorganize and close loss-making factories. In recent years, thousands of steel workers have lost their jobs because of the closure of many American steel companies. More than two weeks ago, Bethlehem Steel Company went bankrupt. Almost at the same time that Bush announced the implementation of clause 20 1, the national steel company, the fifth largest steel company in the United States, also announced that it had filed for bankruptcy protection, becoming the 32nd American steel company to file for bankruptcy protection in the past four years. Experts believe that this depression is not only caused by the impact of imported product prices, but also by falling demand, ineffective reform and slow technological innovation. However, the American steel industry first targeted foreign products. The American steel industry, which is "imprisoned", is dying. It seized the life-saving straw of the Bush administration and accused the European Union of using safety standards as a shield to restrict steel imports in order to get rid of the current predicament. In recent years, they launched a public opinion offensive and won wide support in Congress. Bush's decision was made under strong pressure from the steel industry and Congress.

3. Due to political needs, the Bush administration.

Lawyer Howard Wayne, a trade expert, told reporters that the case has become a "political case" in essence. Because of this, it will show obvious irrationality. Even Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said that he disagreed with President Bush's decision to raise tariffs on various imported steel products. He said: "I don't agree with this decision, but I know it is a very difficult decision that President Bush must make."

In 2000, Bush narrowly defeated his opponent in the closest presidential election in American history. For months, lobbying groups in the US steel industry have been lobbying members of Congress. In this case, President Bush launched a safeguard investigation on almost all steel products. Last year, in June+10, 5438, the US International Trade Commission ruled that imported steel harmed the US steel industry. In February 65438, most members of the International Trade Commission proposed to impose tariffs on imported steel. The tax rate of any kind of steel should not exceed 20%, and about 80% of the total steel imports in the United States will be affected. However, unlike anti-dumping measures, the International Trade Commission has no final decision on the implementation of safeguard clauses. The president has the right to change his proposal. In theory, this power enables the president to carefully consider the public interest before taxing. Almost every time the safeguard clause is implemented, the president's revised plan is not as strict as the original plan of the International Trade Commission. In fact, in the past 25 years, about half of the presidents finally decided not to implement import protection measures. This time, President Bush broke the precedent. According to President Bush's proposal, almost all major types of steel products are subject to 30% tariff, including steel plates, hot rolled sheets, cold rolled sheets, hot rolled strips and cold rolled strips. For another major steel-thick steel plate, Bush asked for an import quota, and his plan was far stricter than the quota plan proposed by the Committee. Only the eight major steels involved account for more than 70% of US steel imports.

Zhang Jinshu, a lawyer of GT Law Firm, one of the largest law firms in the United States, said that Bush's practice did not conform to the competition principle of the market economy at all and was very unfavorable to consumers. It is estimated that with the increase of tariffs, the prices of many products, such as cars and building materials, will rise sharply. President Bush is not ignorant of this, but he has to consider the mid-term elections. On this issue? Quot politics is overwhelming. " Aikenson, an expert at Cato Institute in the United States, pointed out that American steel users created 13. 1% of the gross domestic product of the United States, while steel manufacturers only accounted for 0.5%. At present, the output of American steel enterprises far exceeds the demand of defense industry. No matter from which point of view, it is unreasonable to save the American steel industry by raising tariffs and implementing protectionist policies, which will make downstream users have to raise product prices accordingly. The American Federation of Consumer Industry Trade Action calculated that the tariff protection of steel imports may save 4,375 jobs in the steel industry, but the loss of American consumers will be as high as $2 billion, and 36 164 employees in other related industries will lose their jobs. The United States will hold the mid-term congressional elections in June 5438+065438+ 10, and the Bush administration is facing enormous political pressure from the steel industry. Because President Bush has always adhered to the strong dollar policy, the price of imported steel products has fallen, causing dissatisfaction in the domestic steel industry. Bush hopes to reduce the dissatisfaction of the steel industry by raising tariffs. As Brendan Brown, chief economist of Mitsubishi International in Tokyo, said, this move is a decision made by the Bush administration to win the key votes of the Midwest Steel Belt. A few negative votes in the west may determine whether the results of the parliamentary election in June 165438+ 10 are beneficial to the Bush administration.

4. The recovery of American protectionism.

The increasingly strict trade restrictions in the United States are mainly due to the increasing trend of global economic multipolarization. Since the 1970s, the United States has faced strong challenges from Western Europe, Japan and emerging market countries and regions at home and abroad. The monopoly position of the United States in international trade no longer exists, and the proportion of its merchandise exports in world trade has dropped from 15.2% in 1970 to 1 1.5%. The foreign trade deficit has expanded sharply since 197 1 first appeared. In the 1980s, the accumulated foreign trade deficit between China and the United States was as high as 10362 billion US dollars. The huge trade deficit, coupled with the huge fiscal deficit, has become a major hidden danger that restricts the economic development of the United States. How to make use of the fact that the global economy is changing from a traditional industrial economy to a knowledge-based economy and how to reverse this unfavorable pattern has become an urgent task for American foreign trade and the development of the entire national economy. 1In September, 1993, in view of the deterioration of American foreign trade and the rise of knowledge economy at that time, the Clinton administration changed the "laissez-faire" policy pursued by previous governments in the field of foreign trade after the war and launched the "National Export Strategy". 1In July 1997, Clinton announced what he called the "global Internet trade strategy" as the engine of future economic growth. Since it was put into practice, it has achieved certain results. The original deterioration of foreign trade has been effectively reversed, and the market share and trade deficit have improved significantly. However, after the Asian financial crisis, the trade deficit of the United States has been rising. With the rapid economic decline and rising unemployment rate in the United States, the trade deficit is approaching 4.5% of GDP, and the protectionist forces in the United States are bound to make a comeback, demanding that the government take tough measures to protect the interests of domestic manufacturers, even at the expense of a big trade war.

In the analysis of traditional bilateral trade relations, comparative cost theory has always had an important influence. This theory emphasizes that comparative cost advantage is the basis of bilateral trade. A country can choose relatively low-cost products for production and export in exchange for relatively high-cost products, thus gaining benefits through international trade. Another influential theory to analyze international trade is the factor endowment theory. The theory holds that the difference between natural resources and production factors is the basis of international trade. The factors of production and the proportion of various factors required in the production process of various products are different, and the resources owned by countries and the number of factors of production restricted by resources are also different, while the flow of resources and factors is restricted by objective conditions. Therefore, countries choose their own factor-intensive products for production and then exchange them. According to its explanation, some products need more labor and belong to labor-intensive products, while others need more capital and belong to capital-intensive products. Some countries have sufficient labor and low wage rates, while others have sufficient capital and low capital prices. Countries with more capital, such as the United States, should produce capital-intensive products, while countries with abundant labor, such as China, should produce labor-intensive products and then exchange them.

The problem now is that the United States should not only produce and export capital-intensive products, but also maintain the production of labor-intensive products. With the rapid development of economic globalization, the United States is not only inferior to emerging market countries in labor-intensive products, but also inferior to other industrialized countries in capital-intensive and technology-intensive products. Faced with such an embarrassing situation, some industries in the United States insist on clinging to defects rather than accelerating the necessary structural adjustment, so they can only build many barriers to prevent foreign goods with good quality and low price from entering.

Some analysts believe that the reason why the United States swept the world and provoked this "unprecedented" dispute is because its unilateralism reached its peak after the "9. 1 1" incident and completely ignored other countries. In recent months, this "power position" of the United States has been reflected in many aspects of American foreign policy, and foreign trade is no exception.

Two. Consequences of the United States' decision to raise tariffs on imported steel products;

1, the impact on the United States:

(1) Impact on American steel industry: America is the largest steel market in the world. Last year, the United States imported 27 million tons of steel, including 265,438+200,000 tons of finished steel and 5.8 million tons of semi-finished steel. After the implementation of clause 20 1, the import of finished steel in the United States may decrease by 5 million tons to160,000 tons in the next few years. Bush's decision will lead to an increase in the price of steel in the United States, but its price is unlikely to return to the level of 1997 required by the steel industry. Due to the frequent use of anti-dumping law and strong dollar in the United States, the steel price in the United States has reached the highest in the world. At present, the utilization rate of equipment in the steel industry is 75%; Only the rebound in steel demand can push the price up sharply, and the protection industry cannot achieve this goal. Moreover, the capacity of small steel mills in the United States has expanded significantly, which will offset the impact of raising tariffs to some extent. In the past five years, small steel mills in the United States have increased tens of millions of tons of low-cost and high-efficiency production capacity. Just last month, Nucor, the largest steel producer in the United States, announced that it would build a steel plant with a capacity of 2 million tons.

The move by the United States to close the domestic market to foreign manufacturers will accelerate the expansion plan of small steel mills. According to accepted estimates, compared with large comprehensive steel mills, small steel mills have a cost advantage of at least $65,438+000 per ton of steel. President Bush's decision will not narrow this gap. Rising steel prices mean that even inefficient American steel companies can rely on external support to survive. There is still a gap of $654.38+0.3 billion in the pension and medical fund in the steel industry, which needs to be raised through sales at this stage, which will reduce the profits of some manufacturers by $50 per ton of steel.

(2) It reflects a major turning point in the US trade policy: Grant Oldner, the deputy director in charge of international trade of the US Department of Commerce, even threatened that if the economies of EU countries and Japan failed to recover, the US restrictions on international trade would spread from steel trade to other industries, including agriculture and semiconductor industries. This is the first time that the Bush administration has linked the steel trade measures with the major problems of the global economy. This marks a turning point in American trade policy. From 65438 to 2005, American trade policy focused almost entirely on opening overseas markets and helping American exporters. Although the Bush administration keeps saying that it will further implement the trade opening policy, the strong protection for steel manufacturers clearly recognizes that the domestic support for free trade in the United States has been greatly weakened.

(3) Increasing steel import tariffs may also weaken the US dollar exchange rate. The new tariff system not only exposes the adverse effects of a strong dollar on American trade, but also shows that the strong dollar policy has caused damage to American steel enterprises. Last summer, the National Manufacturers Association of the United States organized a demonstration in Washington, demanding that the dollar depreciate. Since then, the dollar has continued to climb, which is even worse for steel enterprises that are doing business overseas and trying to compete with imported products. For the dollar, the increase in tariffs makes investors think that the US government is under strong pressure from enterprises, and its strong dollar policy may change, thus affecting investors' confidence in the future of the dollar. Lehman Brothers foreign exchange strategist said that although the United States imposed a tax on imported steel products, it would not change the strong dollar policy. However, this decision of the United States shows the protectionist tendency of the Bush administration, which is not good for the dollar.

2. International influence.

All major trading partners condemned the decision of the United States, even those countries that the United States planned to give preferential treatment. The dispute provoked by the United States has had a chain effect, and the normal order of the world steel market has been destroyed. Discussions within the OECD on reducing the scale of world steel production have also died. As the representative of the European Union to the WTO pointed out, what is the decision of the United States? Quot This is not only bad for the American economy, but also bad for the steel market and the world trading system. "Japan, South Korea and Brazil will join hands with the EU to resist this decision. They have submitted a formal complaint to the WTO, and the United States will face many difficulties in defending itself. Unlike the vague rules applicable to anti-dumping measures, the WTO rules on safeguard measures are extremely strict. In the past three years, the United States lost two trade cases involving safeguard measures in the WTO. Most experts believe that this decision of the United States is a serious violation of WTO rules, which is very serious. However, the WTO dispute settlement procedure is extremely lengthy, and before the judgment is made, the three-year period for the United States to implement safeguard measures may have ended. The decision of the United States will have many international effects:

The weakness of the dispute settlement mechanism. It is almost certain that the WTO will rule that the decision of the United States violates its rules, but it is not binding on the United States, which shows that the dispute settlement mechanism of the WTO has obvious defects. Both the United States and Europe have been harmed by the WTO ruling, and some people worry that both sides will seek to take action to cancel or weaken this mechanism.

-negotiations on production capacity. In view of the decision of the United States, countries have started a dialogue under the auspices of the OECD, and the prospect of reducing production capacity in the global steel industry is increasingly bleak. If such an important country takes unilateral action, it will inevitably increase tens of millions of tons of excess or inefficient production capacity in the steel industry, and the resulting problems are difficult to solve.

-Balance of political interests. The impact on American trading partners will be uneven. Turkish steel will basically not be affected, and Russian steel will not be seriously affected, in part because these two countries have played an important role in the "war on terror." Steel products from Brazil and Argentina are treated much better than those from the European Union and East Asia. The United States is trying to establish a free trade zone covering the whole western hemisphere, so it hopes to reduce the opposition of relevant countries.

Medium and long-term impact. It is extremely unlikely that countries will take retaliatory measures directly. The EU has indicated that it will not retaliate immediately, and has not linked the steel trade dispute with the issue of export subsidies. Regarding the latter, the WTO has agreed that the EU can impose tariffs of up to $4 billion on the United States. No country wants to be seen as a trade war with the United States. Nevertheless, the US decision will have many medium and long-term effects:

-countries may retaliate in a more ingenious way. Russia announced that it would ban the import of poultry meat from the United States, ostensibly because it was worried that harmful additives were used in American poultry meat.

-This action makes it difficult for Japan and the European Union to promote the agricultural reform that will have great international significance, because the United States has shown by actions that domestic political interests are higher than international commitments.

-The Doha Round of global trade negotiations will not be seriously affected. Although Bush's decision destroyed the atmosphere of negotiations to some extent, fortunately, the Doha Round is far from reaching the stage of substantive negotiations.

The most serious consequence is that the decision of the United States may have a "domino effect" on the decision of its trading partners. Since last autumn, Canada has begun to plan its own trade safeguard measures. The only question at present is when to start the investigation. Now that the United States has announced the implementation of safeguard measures to support the steel industry, European steel companies have begun to ask the European Union to conduct safeguard investigations. Both Canada and the European Union are worried that steel that should have entered the American market will instead flow into the local market. But unlike the United States, Canada and the European Union are likely to wait for the growth of steel imports before implementing safeguard measures, so as not to openly challenge WTO rules like the United States.

The adverse effect in the near future will be that this decision may lead many countries to adopt similar trade protection measures to protect their domestic steel market from changes in the international market, because the action of the United States will lower the global steel price.

EU Trade Commissioner Lamy said that the decision of the United States to adopt protectionism is a major retrogression in the global trading system, and the EU will also consider adopting trade barriers to prevent the steel exports of Russia, Latin America and Asia from being diverted to Europe due to the refusal of the United States, which will lead to a surge in steel imports of EU countries. 25% of the high value-added steel products imported by the United States come from Europe, and such products will be subject to a tariff of up to 30%. More than 2 million tons of European steel exported to the United States every year will be affected. According to EU data,160,000 tons of steel exported from other countries may be transferred to Europe. WTO rules allow the EU to impose tariffs or quotas on steel to protect domestic industries when the import of products may increase substantially.

In addition to the European Union, Russia, Japan, South Korea and Brazil all said that they would retaliate if Washington set up tariff barriers. Brazilian steel industry professionals and economists said that the US tariff increase would first make the Free Trade Area of the Americas exist in name only. Russia's steel industry will also be seriously affected. The Russian Foreign Ministry issued a warning that this move by the United States will force Russia to reduce the import quota of low-priced grain exported to the United States and will seriously affect the friendly atmosphere of bilateral relations. After the United States raises tariffs, Japan's steel exports will basically be rejected. On the 6th, Japanese Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Takeo Hiranuma expressed "great regret" over the decision of the United States to impose tariffs on imported steel, and questioned whether the severe blow suffered by the American steel industry was enough to require the United States to use protective measures. Japan will consider complaining to the World Trade Organization about the EU and South Korea.

The imposition of high steel tariffs by the United States will have a huge impact on the Asian steel industry. Three of the world's top five steel producers are in Asia, and the Bush administration's increase in steel import tariffs has made Asia the main victim. According to the latest data of the World Iron and Steel Association, Asia is the region with the highest steel output in the world, accounting for about 43% of the global steel output in June+10/October, 5438. China's iron and steel output ranks first in the world, with the output expected to be14.5 million tons in June, 5438. Japan ranks second with an output of 8.48 million tons, and South Korea ranks fifth with an output of 38 1 10,000 tons. On the 7th, the share prices of Japanese, Korean, Taiwan Province and Australian steel enterprises all fell sharply. In addition, the most worrying thing is not the decline of Asian steel exports to the United States, but that the global surplus steel supply may all be dumped to Asia, which will further depress the steel prices in Asia and further reduce the profits of Asian steel enterprises. It is predicted that the potential increase of steel supply will damage the current rebound of steel prices in Asia and adversely affect the recovery of Asian economy. The situation in Asia is similar. The direct impact of this move by the United States on Asian steel enterprises will not be too great. According to statistics from the United States, South Korea and Japan, the major Asian steel producers, exported 2.22 million tons and 6.5438+0.88 million tons of steel to the United States respectively last year. Compared with the EU, the number is not too large. However, the impact on some key enterprises in the steel industry is still considerable. Moreover, Asian countries are also facing the risk of steel backflow, which may suppress the market in the next few years.

After China's entry into WTO, it will also become the market for all steel manufacturers, and the domestic steel industry will face fierce competition. Statistics from the US show that China ranks eighth in the US steel import list. Last year, it exported about 720,000 tons of steel to the US, with a total amount of about 700 million US dollars. Lawyer Bruce, a trade expert, said that China's steel exports to the United States are limited, which has little direct impact. However, it should be considered that this has something to do with the repeated anti-dumping measures taken by the United States in recent years to suppress China's steel products. This tax has once again frustrated China's exports of steel products to the United States. More importantly, the US market is very important to China's future steel export. Once it loses its market share, it will be difficult to regain it, because countries that have obtained tax-free treatment, such as Canada and Mexico, will never let go of this vacancy.