GTHT has released a research report stating that the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling against the Trump administration's reciprocal tariffs imposed under IEEPA was followed by Trump's announcement of temporary 10% global import tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. The firm believes reflation risks remain elevated, with new tariff rates and refund disputes increasing policy uncertainty. Market expectations indicate temporary but limited increases in USD and U.S. Treasury volatility, with attention focused on potential policy adjustments. GTHT's key views are as follows:
First, with reciprocal tariffs overturned, what policy adjustments will follow? Following the Supreme Court's February 20 ruling against IEEPA-based reciprocal tariffs, Trump announced temporary 10% global tariffs under Section 122. Short-term adjustments will rely on Section 122 temporary tariffs. With reciprocal tariffs invalidated, only Sections 232 and 301 tariffs remain effective, reducing the average tariff rate from 17.6% to 9%. Section 122 can maintain rates largely unchanged for 150 days. Medium to long-term adjustments will center on Section 232 industry-specific tariffs and Section 301 country-specific tariffs.
By 2025, Section 232 tariffs already cover automobiles, steel, aluminum, copper, furniture, and trucks, with semiconductors added early this year (though mostly exempted). Ongoing investigations involve pharmaceuticals, aircraft, critical minerals, drones, wind turbines, robotics, industrial machinery, and polysilicon, with most results expected by first half 2026. These Section 232 products constitute about 20% of U.S. imports. To compensate for the reciprocal tariff gap, approximately 40% tariff rates would be required. Major import sources include China, Mexico, EU, Vietnam, and Canada, with particular attention needed on country-specific impacts of Section 232 implementation. 2025 experience shows imports from EU and Canada have higher inflation transmission efficiency.
Second, overturning reciprocal tariffs doesn't equate to disinflation. Reflation risks remain high due to three factors: companies that have successfully passed tariff costs to consumers may lack motivation to seek refunds through case-by-case litigation, meaning corresponding商品 prices may not adjust downward; exporters have absorbed some tariff costs (reflected in USD depreciation while U.S. import prices remain stable), minimizing tariff impact on商品 prices - tariff reductions could actually provide exporters with pricing flexibility; considering both Trump and Beshear have indicated alternative tariffs would maintain similar rates and revenue levels, coupled with refund uncertainties, companies' plans to pass tariffs downstream may remain largely unaffected.
Third, fiscal impacts show slightly increased pressure. Reciprocal tariffs accounted for nearly 60% of U.S. tariff revenue, making fiscal impacts a market focus. Short-term, even with full refunds (approximately $170 billion), the Treasury's $900 billion balance remains sufficient with limited financing pressure. Medium-term, tracking Section 232 and 301 implementation is crucial. The Beautiful America Act annually increases deficit by about $300 billion. Without new tariffs after reciprocal tariff overturn, net bond financing needs would triple current levels, significantly increasing supply pressure. The firm expects tariffs to ultimately decrease slightly by 2-3%, raising fiscal deficit ratio by approximately 0.1-0.2%, with limited impact on U.S. Treasury supply pressure.
Fourth, asset pricing reflects renewed policy uncertainty. Markets anticipated the Supreme Court overturning reciprocal tariffs and White House seeking alternatives, resulting in temporary but limited increases in USD and U.S. Treasury volatility. For Trump, IEEPA provided more negotiation leverage compared to Sections 232 and 301. Market focus remains on policy adjustments and whether less effective alternatives might prompt Trump to seek more aggressive policy tools, bringing policy uncertainty back to forefront and creating favorable conditions for gold performance.
Risk提示: Uncertainty surrounding Trump administration's tariff policies.
Comments