图片来源：《纽约时报》

自从对中国发动贸易战以来，特朗普总统几次三番催促美国企业撤离中国。8月25日，他在社交媒体推特上向美国在华企业发号施令：“我命令我们那些优秀的美国公司立即开始寻找替代国方案，包括将公司迁回国内，在美国制造产品。”

虽频频施压，但成效不彰。据美中贸易全国委员会最新调查，87%的在华美国企业2019年没有搬迁或计划迁出中国的打算。另据报道，一些美国大公司还直接抗命，在中国投资建设新项目。美国最大石油公司埃克森美孚公司决定出资100亿美元在中国广东建设大型独资石化项目；特斯拉上海超级工厂在今年1月动工，目前工程建设进展顺利，预计今年年底正式投产。

美国企业留恋中国，原因不言自明，那就是不想让自己的经济利益受到损害。众多美国企业已在华经营数十年，盈利状况良好。美中贸易全国委员会最新公布的一项调查结果显示，97%的美国企业表示在华有利可图。另一个数据表明，美资企业全球海外销售总额增长的1/3来自中国。

对美国企业更具吸引力的是，中国不断扩大对外开放，经济潜力巨大，盈利前景诱人。据布鲁金斯学会预计，从2009年至2030年，中国将新增8.5亿中产阶级人群，中产阶级占比将由2009年的12%上升到2030年的73%，中国的消费将占全球总消费的22%。

中国还向外国企业提供不断优化的经营环境。世界银行《2019年营商研究报告》指出，中国营商环境总体评价在190个经济体中排行第46，较2018年提升32位。欧洲国家及韩国、日本等都看好中国市场，大幅增加在中国的投资。今年1至5月，德国、韩国、日本、英国在中国投资分别增长100．8%，88.1%，19.9%，9.2%。欧盟对华投资增长29.5%。形势对美国企业是如此严峻，它们若撤离中国，马上就有竞争对手填缺补位。一旦离开，再想回来就难了。这种状况意味着美国企业不战而退，将经济利益拱手让给竞争对手，它们当然不甘心。

特朗普要美国企业寻找离开中国的替代国方案。这说起来轻松做起来难。事实上，随着中国企业的转型升级，美国一些技术含量较低的劳动密集型企业早就开始向中国周边国家转移，这是资源自然配置的结果，顺理成章，但要将较高技术含量的企业搬出中国，就难以找到落脚点。一些准备撤离中国的美国企业发现，很难找到与中国生产环境相匹配的地区。《纽约时报》8月24日的文章指出，中国是生产各种商品最高效的地方，它建立了由小型工厂构成的厐大网络，为大型工厂提供必要的零部件。它拥有数亿知道如何在流水线上工作的劳动力，有快速的火车、通畅的公路和高效的港口，可以妥善地把货物从工厂运到世界各地。

越南被公认是美国企业撤出中国的首选目标，但《华尔街日报》近日的一篇调查报道明确指出，越南代替不了中国，中国在产品制造方面领先越南15年，这种差距意味着无法与在中国的企业竞争。至于孟加拉国、缅甸、印尼乃至印度，基础设施、交道运输、工人技能、社会治安等各方面都比不上越南。美国企业对这些国家望而却步，一点也不奇怪。

美国企业从中国搬迁回国，会面临很多难题，如何招到合格的员工就是道难迈的坎。在中国很有实力的福耀玻璃厂，生产全国60%以上的汽车玻璃，2010年应美国通用汽车公司的要求在美国投资设厂，主要为通用生产汽车玻璃。这家企业的老板感叹，他在美国刚建厂时就留下一个深刻印象，愿意在工厂工作的都是老年人，基本没有年轻人。他的公司这些年组织过很多次招聘，根本招不到年轻人。不是企业给出的薪水在同行业中没有竞争力，也不是因为受到歧视，而是美国青年人愿意栖身华尔街和硅谷，不愿从事制造业。他认为这是美国制造业几十年“空心化”造成的“断代”结果。他所遇到的问题，任何迁回国内的美国企业都会遇到。这是美国企业不肯回国的又一个重要因素。

有评论认为，对特朗普的命令，美国在华企业家似乎有个共识：这个不靠谱的指令一定会随着他的离任而去，因为它违反经济规律，违背民意，会给美国企业和国家造成严重损害。

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.