2月13日，特朗普簽署《互惠貿易和關稅備忘錄》，正式宣布“對等關稅”政策，要求美國與貿易夥伴彼此徵收的關稅稅率相等，並考慮對使用增值稅制度的國家加征關稅。特朗普認為，許多國家在對美貿易中實施了不對等的關稅政策，導致美國商品在國際市場上處於競爭劣勢。因此，他提出“公平互惠貿易計劃”，旨在解決美國貿易“不公平”“不平衡”問題，為美國創造更多崗位就業，加強經濟和國家安全。

關稅一直被視為特朗普貿易政策的支柱，“對等關稅”則是特朗普為實施更大範圍關稅戰提出的新工具，並將成為其第二任期關稅政策的重要組成部分。該政策反映了特朗普政府“美國優先”的一貫立場，是其單邊保護主義路線的延續與升級，同時，它重新定義了WTO框架下的貿易互惠概念，勢必將深刻改變現有多邊貿易秩序。“對等關稅”的實施標誌着美國貿易政策從“單邊加稅”轉向“系統性重構全球關稅體系”，從多邊框架轉向雙邊或區域框架，其根本目的，是藉此重構國際貿易體系，以美國為中心重新制定國際貿易規則。

所謂“對等關稅”指的是美國針對其進口商品，按照貿易夥伴對美國出口商品所徵收的稅率來徵收相同稅率的關稅。根據2019年的研究報告，在132個國家的60多萬個產品系列中，美國2/3以上的產品比其他國家面臨更高的關稅。因此，特朗普政府將優先研究對美貿易順差最大、關稅稅率最高國家的關稅措施和其他貿易壁壘。

特朗普“對等關稅”策略主要包含幾個重點：

其一，稅率對等。

據WTO統計，2023年美國的加權平均關稅水平為2.2%，日本為1.9%，歐盟為2.7%，中國為3%，加拿大為3.4%，墨西哥為3.9%，越南為5.1%，巴西為6.7%，韓國為8.4%，印度則為12%。這是特朗普政府尋求所謂關稅對等的原因。

其二，進出口額對等。

美國政府多次強調，將從對美貿易順差大的經濟體入手展開調查。2024年，中國大陸、歐盟、墨西哥、越南、中國台灣、日本、韓國、加拿大、印度等對美順差額均排前列，其中前五個國家和地區對美貿易順差約佔總額的3/4。美國政府實施這一政策的目的在於縮小對外貿易逆差，針對這些國家將採取額外關稅措施。

其三，非關稅政策對等。

特朗普政府認為，增值稅作為一種對最終消費徵收的稅，與關稅類似，其他國家和地區的高額增值稅對美國不公平。因此，不對等的增值稅可能被納入“對等關稅”政策範疇。2023年，歐盟27國的平均標準增值稅稅率為21.5%，其中盧森堡為16%，匈牙利為27%。全球有175個國家或地區有增值稅制度，而美國在聯邦層面沒有統一的增值稅，在州級層面則有稅率不等（最高可達11.5%）的銷售稅。此外，還涉及歐洲數字服務稅等問題。

目前，特朗普政府還未立即全面實施“對等關稅”，這也意味着可能給貿易談判留出窗口。也有消息稱，印度、日本和澳大利亞正在為達成潛在的貿易協議做準備。從未來走向看，特朗普政府是利用“對等關稅”策略大幅提高進入美國市場的壁壘，還是將其作為槓桿來迫使其他國家與美國達成重大交易，還有待觀察。

美國“對等關稅”政策已經點燃全球貿易戰的火藥桶。中國、加拿大、歐盟、澳大利亞、巴西等國迅速宣布反制措施，其他國家也在醞釀類似的行動。更糟糕的是，這種對抗正在從雙邊層面擴展到多邊層面，甚至可能演變為全球性的經濟對抗。面對特朗普政府無差別的關稅政策，包括美國盟友在內的世界各國已經開始重新評估與美國的貿易關係，尋找新的貿易夥伴，這勢必加速全球貿易格局的分化和重組。而另一方面，其他國家也會效仿美國採取類似的貿易保護主義措施，這將導致全球關稅壁壘螺旋上升，引發全球範圍內的貿易戰。

“對等關稅”不僅將嚴重放緩全球經濟和貿易增長，也將導致全球貿易格局的紊亂，而更深層次的影響，是對國際經濟秩序的破壞。WTO框架下的關稅協調機制以及各國關稅水平的差異是基於歷史談判形成的利益平衡，而美國的單邊行動無疑將導致這種平衡被打破，導致全球關稅協調機制嚴重受阻，使國際關稅協調變得更趨困難。美國試圖通過“對等關稅”重新定義國際貿易規則，也將促使其他國家重新審視和調整自身貿易政策，從而引發國際關稅體系的深刻變革。

On Feb. 13, U.S. President Donald Trump signed a reciprocal trade and tariff memorandum and formally announced the “reciprocal tariffs” policy. This initiative requires the United States and its trading partners to impose equivalent tariff rates on one another's goods, with additional provisions addressing disparities arising from value-added tax (VAT) systems in certain countries.Trump has long argued that many nations maintain inequitable tariff policies that disadvantage American exports in global markets. In response, his administration introduced the so-called Fair and Reciprocal Trade Plan, which was designed to correct perceived trade imbalances, foster job creation and bolster both economic growth and national security.

Tariffs have been a cornerstone of Trump's trade policy, and the reciprocal tariffs initiative represents an expansion of his administration's tariff-based strategy. The policy is expected to serve as a central pillar of Trump's second-term trade agenda, embodying the administration's “America first” philosophy and intensifying its protectionist approach.Further, the policy reinterprets the principle of trade reciprocity within the World Trade Organization framework, which will inevitably challenge the existing multilateral trade order. The implementation of reciprocal tariffs signals a strategic transition in U.S. trade policy — from unilateral tariff increases to a comprehensive restructuring of the whole global tariff system, and shifting from multilateral trade engagements to bilateral or regional agreements. The policy reflects a strategic effort to redefine international trade, ultimately positioning the United States as the principal architect of a new global trade paradigm.

The term “reciprocal tariffs” refers to the United States imposing tariffs on imported goods at rates equivalent to those levied by its trading partners on U.S. exports. A 2019 study analyzing over 600,000 product categories across 132 countries found that more than two-thirds of U.S. products faced higher tariffs abroad than foreign products did in the United States. Consequently, the Trump administration has prioritized the scrutiny of tariff measures and trade barriers in countries with the largest trade surpluses and the highest tariff rates against the United States.

Trump's reciprocal tariff strategy is founded on three key principles:

1. Tariff rate parity

According to WTO data for 2023, the U.S. weighted average tariff rate stood at 2.2 percent, compared with 1.9 percent for Japan, 2.7 percent for the European Union, 3 percent for China, 3.4 percent for Canada, 3.9 percent for Mexico, 5.1 percent for Vietnam, 6.7 percent for Brazil, 8.4 percent for South Korea and 12 percent for India. These disparities serve as the basis for the Trump administration's pursuit of tariff parity, which seeks to align U.S. tariff rates with those imposed by its trading partners.

2. Trade balance parity

The U.S. government has repeatedly emphasized its focus on economies having substantial trade surpluses with the United States. Last year, the Chinese mainland, Taiwan, the European Union, Mexico, Vietnam, Japan, South Korea, Canada and India were among the largest contributors to the U.S. trade deficit. The top five accounted for approximately three-fourths of the total surplus. The reciprocal tariffs policy aims to reduce this trade deficit by imposing additional tariffs on nations with significant surpluses.

3. Non-tariff policy parity

The Trump administration contends that VAT systems— common in many countries — function similarly to tariffs and disadvantage the United States. As such, disparities in VAT rates may fall under the scope of the reciprocal tariffs policy. In 2023, the average standard VAT rate across the 27 EU member states was 21.5 percent, ranging from 16 percent in Luxembourg to 27 percent in Hungary. Globally, 175 countries or regions employ VAT systems, whereas the United States lacks a federal VAT, relying instead on state-level sales taxes that can reach up to 11.5 percent.Additionally, other non-tariff barriers, such as Europe's digital services tax, are under consideration within the broader scope of reciprocal tariff measures.

As of now, the Trump administration has not fully implemented the reciprocal tariffs policy, leaving room for potential trade negotiations. Reports indicate that India, Japan and Australia are preparing for possible trade agreements in response to the initiative. However, the future trajectory of this policy remains uncertain. Will it serve as a mechanism to erect substantial barriers to the U.S. market, or will it function as leverage to compel other nations into making significant trade concessions?

The introduction of reciprocal tariffs has ignited tensions in the global trade arena, raising the specter of an escalating trade war. China, Canada, the European Union, Australia and Brazil have already announced countermeasures, while other countries are considering similar actions. Alarmingly, the conflict appears to be expanding from bilateral disputes to multilateral confrontations, potentially culminating in a global economic standoff.Faced with the Trump administration's aggressive tariff policies, nations around the world — including traditional U.S. allies — are reassessing their trade relationships with the United States and exploring alternative partnerships. This shift is accelerating the reshaping of global trade dynamics. Other countries may be incentivized to adopt similar protectionist measures, escalating global tariff barriers that could ultimately lead to a full-scale international trade war.

The ramifications of reciprocal tariffs extend far beyond the immediate slowdown in global economic growth and trade activity. The policy threatens to unravel the intricate fabric of global trade as it presents profound challenges to the international economic system. The WTO's tariff coordination mechanisms, as well as the historically negotiated balance of tariff levels among nations, are the products of decades of painstaking negotiations and compromises. The unilateral action by the United States risks disrupting this delicate equilibrium, severely hindering global tariff coordination and rendering future international trade negotiations increasingly fraught with uncertainty.By seeking to redefine international trade rules through the reciprocal tariffs policy, the United States is compelling other nations to reevaluate and recalibrate their own trade policies. This shift sets the stage for a profound transformation of the global tariff regime.