圖片來源：《紐約時報》

自從對中國發動貿易戰以來，特朗普總統幾次三番催促美國企業撤離中國。8月25日，他在社交媒體推特上向美國在華企業發號施令：“我命令我們那些優秀的美國公司立即開始尋找替代國方案，包括將公司遷回國內，在美國製造產品。”

雖頻頻施壓，但成效不彰。據美中貿易全國委員會最新調查，87%的在華美國企業2019年沒有搬遷或計劃遷出中國的打算。另據報道，一些美國大公司還直接抗命，在中國投資建設新項目。美國最大石油公司埃克森美孚公司決定出資100億美元在中國廣東建設大型獨資石化項目；特斯拉上海超級工廠在今年1月動工，目前工程建設進展順利，預計今年年底正式投產。

美國企業留戀中國，原因不言自明，那就是不想讓自己的經濟利益受到損害。眾多美國企業已在華經營數十年，盈利狀況良好。美中貿易全國委員會最新公布的一項調查結果顯示，97%的美國企業表示在華有利可圖。另一個數據表明，美資企業全球海外銷售總額增長的1/3來自中國。

對美國企業更具吸引力的是，中國不斷擴大對外開放，經濟潛力巨大，盈利前景誘人。據布魯金斯學會預計，從2009年至2030年，中國將新增8.5億中產階級人群，中產階級佔比將由2009年的12%上升到2030年的73%，中國的消費將佔全球總消費的22%。

中國還向外國企業提供不斷優化的經營環境。世界銀行《2019年營商研究報告》指出，中國營商環境總體評價在190個經濟體中排行第46，較2018年提升32位。歐洲國家及韓國、日本等都看好中國市場，大幅增加在中國的投資。今年1至5月，德國、韓國、日本、英國在中國投資分別增長100．8%，88.1%，19.9%，9.2%。歐盟對華投資增長29.5%。形勢對美國企業是如此嚴峻，它們若撤離中國，馬上就有競爭對手填缺補位。一旦離開，再想回來就難了。這種狀況意味着美國企業不戰而退，將經濟利益拱手讓給競爭對手，它們當然不甘心。

特朗普要美國企業尋找離開中國的替代國方案。這說起來輕鬆做起來難。事實上，隨着中國企業的轉型升級，美國一些技術含量較低的勞動密集型企業早就開始向中國周邊國家轉移，這是資源自然配置的結果，順理成章，但要將較高技術含量的企業搬出中國，就難以找到落腳點。一些準備撤離中國的美國企業發現，很難找到與中國生產環境相匹配的地區。《紐約時報》8月24日的文章指出，中國是生產各種商品最高效的地方，它建立了由小型工廠構成的龎大網絡，為大型工廠提供必要的零部件。它擁有數億知道如何在流水線上工作的勞動力，有快速的火車、通暢的公路和高效的港口，可以妥善地把貨物從工廠運到世界各地。

越南被公認是美國企業撤出中國的首選目標，但《華爾街日報》近日的一篇調查報道明確指出，越南代替不了中國，中國在產品製造方面領先越南15年，這種差距意味着無法與在中國的企業競爭。至於孟加拉國、緬甸、印尼乃至印度，基礎設施、交道運輸、工人技能、社會治安等各方面都比不上越南。美國企業對這些國家望而卻步，一點也不奇怪。

美國企業從中國搬遷回國，會面臨很多難題，如何招到合格的員工就是道難邁的坎。在中國很有實力的福耀玻璃廠，生產全國60%以上的汽車玻璃，2010年應美國通用汽車公司的要求在美國投資設廠，主要為通用生產汽車玻璃。這家企業的老闆感嘆，他在美國剛建廠時就留下一個深刻印象，願意在工廠工作的都是老年人，基本沒有年輕人。他的公司這些年組織過很多次招聘，根本招不到年輕人。不是企業給出的薪水在同行業中沒有競爭力，也不是因為受到歧視，而是美國青年人願意棲身華爾街和硅谷，不願從事製造業。他認為這是美國製造業幾十年“空心化”造成的“斷代”結果。他所遇到的問題，任何遷回國內的美國企業都會遇到。這是美國企業不肯回國的又一個重要因素。

有評論認為，對特朗普的命令，美國在華企業家似乎有個共識：這個不靠譜的指令一定會隨着他的離任而去，因為它違反經濟規律，違背民意，會給美國企業和國家造成嚴重損害。

Source：The New York Times

Since the start of the trade war with China, U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly urged American companies to leave China. “Our great American companies are hereby ordered to immediately start looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your companies HOME and making your products in the USA,” he tweeted.

Although pressure is high, it has been ineffective. According to the U.S.-China Business Council (U.S.CBC), 87 percent of companies have not moved or have no plans to move out of China in 2019. According to reports, some large American companies are openly refusing to leave and even investing in new projects in China. ExxonMobil, the U.S.' largest oil and gas company, decided to invest $10 billion to build a large-scale petrochemical project in Guangdong, China. In January this year, construction started on Tesla's mega plant in Shanghai, which is progressing smoothly and should be running by the end of this year.

American companies are reluctant to leave China because they do not want to harm their economic interests. Many American companies have been operating profitably in China for decades. According to the latest survey released by U.S.CBC, 97 percent of American companies in China believe they are making profits. Other data shows that one-third of U.S.-funded companies' global sales growth from abroad comes from China.

What is even more attractive to American companies is that China is constantly opening up further to the outside world, which means huge economic potential and attractive prospects for profitability. According to The Brookings Institution, China will add 850 million people to its middle class from 2009 to 2030. The middle class will rise from 12 percent in 2009 to 73 percent in 2030, and consumption in China will reach $1.433 billion, accounting for 22 percent of the global total.

China also provides an increasingly optimized business environment for foreign companies. In the World Bank Group's report Doing Business 2019: Training for Reform, China ranked 46th of 190 economies last year, up 32 places from 78th in 2018. European countries, as well as the Republic of Korea and Japan, are optimistic about the Chinese market and have significantly increased their investments in China. From January to May this year, Germany, the Republic of Korea, Japan and the United Kingdom increased their investments in China by 100.8, 88.1, 19.9 and 9.2 percent, respectively; and the EU's investments in China increased by 29.5 percent.American companies face the reality that if they leave China, competitors will fill the gap at once. Moreover, once they leave, it would be difficult to return. This means that American companies would retreat without a fight and hand the economic benefits to their competitors. They are not, of course, willing to do this.

Trump wants American companies to look for an alternative to China; this is easier said than done. In fact, with the transformation and upgrading of Chinese enterprises, labor-intensive American companies with low technological content in China have begun to shift to China's neighboring countries. This is the result of the natural allocation of resources and is rational and expected. However, it would be difficult to relocate higher-tech enterprises out of China. Some American companies preparing to leave China have found it difficult to find areas that match the Chinese production environment. A New York Times report on August 24 pointed out that China is the most efficient place to produce a wide variety of goods. The report stated that China has built vast networks of smaller factories that supply essential components to large factories; has a workforce of hundreds of millions of people who know how to staff an assembly line; and has fast trains, smooth highways and efficient ports that dependably move goods from the factory floor to the world.

Vietnam is the preferred target for American companies that want to leave China, but a recent report by The Wall Street Journal clearly stated that Vietnam could not replace China, as China has a 15-year head start on Vietnam in manufacturing. This gap means that Vietnam is unable to compete with companies in China. As for Bangladesh, Myanmar, Indonesia and even India, infrastructure, transportation, worker skills and social security are not comparable to even Vietnam. Thus, it is not surprising that American companies are hesitant about moving to these countries.

If American companies move back home from China, they will face many difficulties, including in recruiting qualified employees. Fuyao, a glass factory in China, produces more than 60 percent of the China's automotive glass. In 2010, in response to General Motors, it invested in setting up a factory in America to produce automotive glass. Since the factory opened, it has struggled to recruit young people. The impediment is not that the salary offered is not competitive in the industry, nor is it discrimination against the Chinese company. American youth are willing to live on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley, but they are unwilling to engage in manufacturing. Fuyao's owner believes that this is the result of years of hollowing out the U.S. manufacturing industry. This is another crucial factor for American companies considering a return home from China.

Some commentators believe that American entrepreneurs in China have come to a consensus on Trump's order: This unreliable order will end with his departure, because it is a bad idea that violates natural laws as well as public opinion, and threatens serious damage to the United States and its businesses.