8月6日，美国突然宣布将中国列为“汇率操纵国”，这是25年来的首次。尽管认定中国为汇率操纵国是美国政府近20年来一直在考虑的事情，然而为何此时将中国列为“汇率操纵国”，其背后的真实目的是什么，又会对当前中美局势及世界经济产生怎样的影响？

对全球主要国家进行汇率评估是美国的“例行公事”。美国财政部每半年提供一次报告，评估主要贸易伙伴是否为了获得不公平竞争优势而操纵本国货币。其对汇率操纵国的认定基于国内两部法案，一部是1988年《贸易和竞争法案》，另一部是2015年《贸易便利和贸易执行法案》。两部法案对汇率操纵国的标准不同，相比之下，前者更为宽松，而后者更为量化。2015年法案判定是否操纵汇率有三个标准：与美国贸易顺差超过200亿美元；该国经常账户顺差占GDP比重至少为2%；该国反复购汇干预在过去12个月中至少维持一半时间，同时净购汇总量至少占GDP的2%。如果满足以上三条标准就会被列为汇率操纵国。

我们注意到，今年5月汇率评估报告采用的是1988年《贸易和竞争法案》的宽泛标准，而非2015年的量化标准。前后评估标准的改变，可见美国政府的随意性和非合理性。而即便如此，中国也只满足第一条，其他两条并不满足。中国经常项目顺差占GDP比重在2005年突破４%的国际标准达5.9%，并在2007年升至10%之后，由于主动实施“贸易平衡战略”目前已降至0.4%，并未超过美国设定2%。在外汇市场方面，被称作“新兴市场之锚”的人民币在2005年汇改后，一直坚持以市场供求为基础、参考一篮子货币调节、有管理的浮动汇率制度。国际清算银行数据显示，2005年至2019年6月，人民币名义有效汇率升值38%，实际有效汇率升值47%，是全球范围内升值幅度最高的货币之一。

欲加之罪，何患无辞。按照美国财政部的说法，中国央行没有动用外汇储备干预市场，就是想任由人民币贬值。这是非常荒谬和颠倒黑白的逻辑。我们不禁怀疑，在中美贸易战这个时间节点上，将中国列为“汇率操纵国”背后的真实目的到底是什么？事实上，去年以来特朗普对“强美元”频繁口头打压，尽管历届美国政府多采取强势美元政策，但在重商主义的特朗普主政下，美元升值超出了特朗普的接受范围。特别是在中美谈判焦灼之际，美国希望通过弱势美元促进出口，刺激美国经济。

另一方面，此举也被视为增加对华施压的筹码，升级其施压手段，包括迫使人民币升值，进一步加征“反汇率补贴税”。此外，还可能根据2015年法案的相关条款规定，采取限制或禁止美国投资公司向中国企业提供融资、禁止政府采购中国的货物或服务合同、将中国企业排除在合作清单之外等措施。鉴于在中美贸易谈判清单中，美方有要求中国开放金融市场的议题和诉求，未来也不排除像上世纪80年代认定韩国、中国台湾操纵汇率后要求其放开资本项目一样，对中国提出全面开放金融市场等领域的条件要求。

美国的单边行动严重破坏了国际规则。在5月汇率评估报告中，观察名单除了中国外，还包括日本、韩国、德国、意大利、马来西亚、新加坡和越南等美国主要贸易伙伴。报告将调查对象从12个扩大到21个，观察名单的条件也放宽，新列入5个国家。仔细分析，新列入国家近年都出现对美出口增幅较大的状况，这意味着特朗普政府遏制伙伴国出口增长、推动解决贸易问题的政策意图十分清晰，而未来也不排除其他国家被列入“汇率操纵国”的可能。汇率问题一旦“武器化”，势必严重扰乱全球金融秩序，加剧全球金融市场波动，导致全球贸易摩擦进一步升级，给本已恶化的世界经济带来更大冲击。

On August 6th, for the first time in 25 years, the United States listed China as a currency manipulator. Although the United States has considered labeling China as a currency manipulator for the past 20 years, they chose this very moment to make this decision. This leads to very important questions: why was China labeled as a currency manipulator at this time? What is the purpose of labeling China as a currency manipulator? And how will this designation affect both the current China-U.S. situation and the world economy?

The United States routinely assesses the exchange rates of major global countries. The U.S. Treasury Department supplies semiannual reports to assess if major trading partners manipulate their currencies to gain an unfair competitive advantage. It determines currency manipulators based on two U.S. bills: the Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 and the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015. The two bills have different standards for what constitutes an exchange rate manipulator, with the former being more lenient and the latter more quantitative. The 2015 Act uses three criteria to determine if a country is manipulating its exchange rate: (1) having a trade surplus with the United States that exceeds $20 billion; (2) having a current account surplus that accounts for at least 2% of the country’s GDP; and (3) conducting repeated foreign exchange interventions equal to at least 2% of the country’s GPD over a period of at least half of 12 months. If the above three criteria are met, the country is designated as a currency manipulator.

In May of this year, the exchange rate assessment report adopted the standard of the Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 instead of the 2015 quantitative standard. The change in the evaluation criteria shows the arbitrariness and irrationality of the U.S. government. Even so, China only met the first one and did not satisfy the other two criteria. As for current account surpluses as a percent of GDP, international standard is 4%; China’s current account surplus as a share of GDP accounted for 5.9% of the international standard line, having exceeded 4% in 2005. After rising to 10% in 2007, China proactively implemented a trade balance strategy. At present, the current account balance has dropped to 0.4%, which is not only significantly lower than international standard, but also does not exceed the U.S. limit of 2%. In the foreign exchange market, following China’s exchange rate reform in 2005, the renminbi (RMB)--known as the anchor of emerging markets--moved to a managed floating exchange rate regime based on market conditions and with reference to a basket of currencies. According to the Bank for International Settlements, from 2005 to June 2019, the nominal effective exchange rate of the RMB rose by 38% and its real effective exchange rate rose by 47%, making it one of the world’s top currencies in terms of appreciation.

If you have it out for someone, you can always find an excuse to punish them. Exemplified in the case of the U.S. Treasury Department’s view that China’s central bank has not used foreign exchange reserves to intervene in the market and wants the RMB to arbitrarily depreciate, such an argument is ridiculous, confounds right and wrong, and turns the facts upside down. Therefore, the Chinese people cannot help but wonder: what is the real purpose behind labeling China as a currency manipulator at this time in the China-U.S. trade war? In fact, Donald Trump has often complained about the strong dollar since last year. Although the strong-dollar policy has been a cornerstone of successive U.S. administrations, under the mercantilist Trump administration, the appreciation of the dollar has exceeded the acceptable range for Trump. Especially amid China-U.S. negotiations, the United States hopes to promote exports through a weak dollar that will stimulate the U.S. economy.

In addition, the move is also seen as an increase in the pressure on China, upgrading the US’s toolbox to include forcing the RMB to appreciate and further adding countervailing duties on more than $500 billion in exports to the United States. Moreover, in accordance with the provisions of the aforementioned 2015 Act, the United States can restrict or prohibit American investment companies from supplying financing to Chinese companies, prohibit government procurement of goods or services originating from China, and exclude Chinese companies from the list of cooperation, and even have the option to instruct the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to start an additional rigorous review of China’s macroeconomic and exchange rate policies. On its list for discussion topics in future China-U.S. trade negotiations, the United States desires to raise issues about and demand China to open its financial markets. Therefore, in the future, similar to how in the 1980s when the United States proposed capital projects to open markets after it designated South Korea and China’s Taiwan as currency manipulators, the US will also propose conditions for China to fully open financial markets and other industries.

The unilateral actions taken by the United States have seriously undermined international rules. In the May exchange rate assessment report, in addition to including China on the watch list, it also included other major trading partners such as Japan, South Korea, Germany, Italy, Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam. The report expanded the countries under scrutiny from 12 countries to 21 countries and the conditions for the watch list also expanded to include five new countries. Careful analysis shows that the newly listed countries have seen a significant increase in exports to the United States in recent years. The Trump administration’s policy intention is to curb the export growth of partner countries and solve trade problems, and we cannot rule out the possibility of other countries labeled as currency manipulators in the future. Once the exchange rate is weaponized, it is bound to seriously disrupt the global financial order, worsen global financial market volatility, and further escalate global trade friction. All of this will have a significant impact on the already deteriorating world economy.