枫国冰都
知名会员
- 注册
- 2019-03-19
- 消息
- 7,081
- 荣誉分数
- 912
- 声望点数
- 123
床铺在搞宣传战，标榜自己赢麻了的姿态。实际上就是对等。一样10%的旧关税，另外25%的特种商品的关税，另外20%的芬太尼，根本就不是什么全部产品55%。
中美贸易达成协议！
- 主题发起人 ottawa_tj
- 开始时间
metropolis
本站元老
- 注册
- 2010-12-10
- 消息
- 11,396
- 荣誉分数
- 2,506
- 声望点数
- 373
反了吧？压力大更不能跪啊
茶马盐铁
我想看看自定义头衔到底能有多少字。继续加，看系统什么时候把这个字符串截断。呃，居然还有？那就继续吧。
- 注册
- 2015-08-14
- 消息
- 31,899
- 荣誉分数
- 7,988
- 声望点数
- 373
billwanhua
本站元老
- 注册
- 2005-07-07
- 消息
- 16,697
- 荣誉分数
- 5,474
- 声望点数
- 373
别乱解释了，
President Donald Trump said in a Truth Social post Wednesday morning that U.S. duties on China will total 55% — but a White House official told CNBC soon after that that figure is not new.
Rather, it comprises the existing 30% blanket U.S. tariffs on China, plus the 25% tariffs on specific products that also were already in place, the official said.
白宫都熄火了，你们别听大嘴瞎掰，他说给红脖子听的，你们是红脖子吗？
等于美国收加拿大50%钢铁税一样，大嘴会对红脖子说加拿大关税是50%
“
but a White House official told CNBC soon after that that figure is not new.
Rather, it comprises the existing 30% blanket U.S. tariffs on China,“
估计白宫不解释，老共明天就会终止稀土出口
President Donald Trump said in a Truth Social post Wednesday morning that U.S. duties on China will total 55% — but a White House official told CNBC soon after that that figure is not new.
Rather, it comprises the existing 30% blanket U.S. tariffs on China, plus the 25% tariffs on specific products that also were already in place, the official said.
白宫都熄火了，你们别听大嘴瞎掰，他说给红脖子听的，你们是红脖子吗？
等于美国收加拿大50%钢铁税一样，大嘴会对红脖子说加拿大关税是50%
“
but a White House official told CNBC soon after that that figure is not new.
Rather, it comprises the existing 30% blanket U.S. tariffs on China,“
估计白宫不解释，老共明天就会终止稀土出口
最后编辑:
EV
金钻会员
- 注册
- 2020-12-06
- 消息
- 689
- 荣誉分数
- 261
- 声望点数
- 73
美国的55%=拜登的25%关税+特朗普的30%（包括今年两次10%的“芬太尼关税”和10%的全球关税）。
中国的关税可不止10%；为了应对“芬太尼关税”，中国两次对部分美国商品加征10%-15%的关税。
这55%的宣传不过是为了满足特朗普团队的虚荣心。
其实，这一切都要追溯到4月2日。
简而言之，特朗普想在日内瓦会谈后威胁中国，暂停学生签证发放，并禁止出口航空发动机和EDA软件……而中国则以限制稀土出口作为回应。
伦敦会谈后，双方同意回到日内瓦会谈的结果——不达成新协议。
特朗普一无所获。
中国获得了EDA软件+飞机零部件（发动机）+学生签证。
而且，美国军方使用稀土必须获得中国的许可。
无论如何，美国在几年内（特朗普任期内）都无法实现稀土自给自足，而中国可以随时将其作为武器进行控制。
中国的关税可不止10%；为了应对“芬太尼关税”，中国两次对部分美国商品加征10%-15%的关税。
这55%的宣传不过是为了满足特朗普团队的虚荣心。
其实，这一切都要追溯到4月2日。
简而言之，特朗普想在日内瓦会谈后威胁中国，暂停学生签证发放，并禁止出口航空发动机和EDA软件……而中国则以限制稀土出口作为回应。
伦敦会谈后，双方同意回到日内瓦会谈的结果——不达成新协议。
特朗普一无所获。
中国获得了EDA软件+飞机零部件（发动机）+学生签证。
而且，美国军方使用稀土必须获得中国的许可。
无论如何，美国在几年内（特朗普任期内）都无法实现稀土自给自足，而中国可以随时将其作为武器进行控制。
metropolis
本站元老
- 注册
- 2010-12-10
- 消息
- 11,396
- 荣誉分数
- 2,506
- 声望点数
- 373
难怪股市基本不动，好像没有恢复到日内瓦，更别提解放前了。
June 11, 2025 11:58 am ET
The U.S. negotiators agreed to relax some recent restrictions on the sale to China of products such as jet engines, sources say. Photo: Luke Sharrett/Bloomberg News
China is putting a six-month limit on rare-earth export licenses for U.S. automakers and manufacturers, according to people familiar with the matter, giving Beijing leverage if trade tensions flare up again while adding to uncertainty for American industry.
Chinese negotiators agreed to the temporary restorations of the licenses after the latest round of intense talks with their American counterparts in London, aimed at upholding an interim agreement forged in Geneva last month.
China Puts Six-Month Limit on Its Ease of Rare-Earth Export Licenses
Tentative deal reached in London gives Beijing leverage in trade talks
June 11, 2025 11:58 am ET
The U.S. negotiators agreed to relax some recent restrictions on the sale to China of products such as jet engines, sources say. Photo: Luke Sharrett/Bloomberg News
China is putting a six-month limit on rare-earth export licenses for U.S. automakers and manufacturers, according to people familiar with the matter, giving Beijing leverage if trade tensions flare up again while adding to uncertainty for American industry.
Chinese negotiators agreed to the temporary restorations of the licenses after the latest round of intense talks with their American counterparts in London, aimed at upholding an interim agreement forged in Geneva last month.
如果真这么回事，那肯定成不了。美国还是拿不到稀土。白忙。
EV
金钻会员
- 注册
- 2020-12-06
- 消息
- 689
- 荣誉分数
- 261
- 声望点数
- 73
Ask Grok, the answer is:
The China-US trade talks in London, concluding on June 10, 2025, resulted in a framework agreement aimed at implementing a prior trade truce from Geneva in May 2025. Both sides reached a consensus to de-escalate tensions, but specific details remain limited. Here’s a breakdown of the outcomes for both sides based on available information:
For the United States:
• Rare Earth Minerals Access: The US secured commitments from China to ease export restrictions on rare earth minerals and magnets, critical for industries like automakers, aerospace, semiconductors, and defense. China granted temporary export licenses to suppliers for the top three US automakers, addressing shortages caused by China’s earlier restrictions in April 2025.
• Easing of US Export Controls: In exchange, the US agreed to relax some export controls on goods to China, particularly those imposed for national security reasons, though restrictions on critical technology like advanced semiconductors remain firm.
• Trade Deficit Reduction Efforts: The US continues to push for China to purchase more American goods to address the $295 billion trade deficit, a key demand from the Trump administration. The framework aims to build on the Geneva consensus to work toward this goal.
• Temporary Tariff Relief: The agreement reinforces the 90-day tariff pause from Geneva, with US tariffs on Chinese goods reduced from 145% to 30%. This provides temporary relief for American businesses and consumers facing potential price hikes or shortages.
For China:
• Eased US Restrictions: China benefits from the US easing some export controls, potentially improving access to certain US goods, though high-end technology like semiconductors remains restricted.
• Student Visa Access: The framework includes provisions allowing Chinese students access to US universities, addressing recent restrictions.
• Trade Stabilization: China avoids further escalation of the trade war, which has severely impacted its exports to the US (down 34.5% year-on-year in May 2025). The framework supports stabilizing economic relations, boosting Asian stock markets like the CSI 300 and Hang Seng.
• Maintaining Leverage: China retains significant leverage through its near-monopoly on rare earths, with analysts noting Beijing may continue to use export controls strategically, though it has signaled willingness to increase license approvals.
Shared Outcomes:
• Framework Agreement: Both sides agreed “in principle” on a framework to implement the Geneva consensus, pending approval from Presidents Trump and Xi Jinping. This framework aims to address trade imbalances, rare earth exports, and technology restrictions, though specifics are unclear.
• Continued Dialogue: The talks establish a consultation mechanism for ongoing trade discussions, with both sides motivated to avoid a full-blown trade war that could disrupt global supply chains and economic growth.
• Global Economic Stability: The agreement mitigates fears of a deepening trade war, with the World Bank noting that heightened trade tensions pose a “significant headwind” to global growth (forecast cut to 2.3% for 2025).
Limitations and Uncertainties:
• Lack of Detail: The framework’s specifics are vague, and its implementation depends on approval from both leaders, leaving room for skepticism about its durability.
• Temporary Measures: The agreement primarily reinforces the Geneva truce rather than resolving deeper issues like China’s state-led economic model or US technology restrictions. Analysts suggest a comprehensive deal is unlikely soon.
• Ongoing Tensions: Issues like fentanyl trade, technology transfers, and China’s export-driven model remain unresolved, with only 60 days left in the 90-day tariff pause (expiring August 2025).
In summary, the US gains improved access to critical rare earths and temporary tariff relief, while China secures eased US export controls and student visa access. Both sides benefit from a framework to continue dialogue and avoid further economic disruption, but the agreement is seen as a temporary fix rather than a resolution of fundamental trade disputes.
The China-US trade talks in London, concluding on June 10, 2025, resulted in a framework agreement aimed at implementing a prior trade truce from Geneva in May 2025. Both sides reached a consensus to de-escalate tensions, but specific details remain limited. Here’s a breakdown of the outcomes for both sides based on available information:
For the United States:
• Rare Earth Minerals Access: The US secured commitments from China to ease export restrictions on rare earth minerals and magnets, critical for industries like automakers, aerospace, semiconductors, and defense. China granted temporary export licenses to suppliers for the top three US automakers, addressing shortages caused by China’s earlier restrictions in April 2025.
• Easing of US Export Controls: In exchange, the US agreed to relax some export controls on goods to China, particularly those imposed for national security reasons, though restrictions on critical technology like advanced semiconductors remain firm.
• Trade Deficit Reduction Efforts: The US continues to push for China to purchase more American goods to address the $295 billion trade deficit, a key demand from the Trump administration. The framework aims to build on the Geneva consensus to work toward this goal.
• Temporary Tariff Relief: The agreement reinforces the 90-day tariff pause from Geneva, with US tariffs on Chinese goods reduced from 145% to 30%. This provides temporary relief for American businesses and consumers facing potential price hikes or shortages.
For China:
• Eased US Restrictions: China benefits from the US easing some export controls, potentially improving access to certain US goods, though high-end technology like semiconductors remains restricted.
• Student Visa Access: The framework includes provisions allowing Chinese students access to US universities, addressing recent restrictions.
• Trade Stabilization: China avoids further escalation of the trade war, which has severely impacted its exports to the US (down 34.5% year-on-year in May 2025). The framework supports stabilizing economic relations, boosting Asian stock markets like the CSI 300 and Hang Seng.
• Maintaining Leverage: China retains significant leverage through its near-monopoly on rare earths, with analysts noting Beijing may continue to use export controls strategically, though it has signaled willingness to increase license approvals.
Shared Outcomes:
• Framework Agreement: Both sides agreed “in principle” on a framework to implement the Geneva consensus, pending approval from Presidents Trump and Xi Jinping. This framework aims to address trade imbalances, rare earth exports, and technology restrictions, though specifics are unclear.
• Continued Dialogue: The talks establish a consultation mechanism for ongoing trade discussions, with both sides motivated to avoid a full-blown trade war that could disrupt global supply chains and economic growth.
• Global Economic Stability: The agreement mitigates fears of a deepening trade war, with the World Bank noting that heightened trade tensions pose a “significant headwind” to global growth (forecast cut to 2.3% for 2025).
Limitations and Uncertainties:
• Lack of Detail: The framework’s specifics are vague, and its implementation depends on approval from both leaders, leaving room for skepticism about its durability.
• Temporary Measures: The agreement primarily reinforces the Geneva truce rather than resolving deeper issues like China’s state-led economic model or US technology restrictions. Analysts suggest a comprehensive deal is unlikely soon.
• Ongoing Tensions: Issues like fentanyl trade, technology transfers, and China’s export-driven model remain unresolved, with only 60 days left in the 90-day tariff pause (expiring August 2025).
In summary, the US gains improved access to critical rare earths and temporary tariff relief, while China secures eased US export controls and student visa access. Both sides benefit from a framework to continue dialogue and avoid further economic disruption, but the agreement is seen as a temporary fix rather than a resolution of fundamental trade disputes.
