2月13日，特朗普签署《互惠贸易和关税备忘录》，正式宣布“对等关税”政策，要求美国与贸易伙伴彼此征收的关税税率相等，并考虑对使用增值税制度的国家加征关税。特朗普认为，许多国家在对美贸易中实施了不对等的关税政策，导致美国商品在国际市场上处于竞争劣势。因此，他提出“公平互惠贸易计划”，旨在解决美国贸易“不公平”“不平衡”问题，为美国创造更多岗位就业，加强经济和国家安全。

关税一直被视为特朗普贸易政策的支柱，“对等关税”则是特朗普为实施更大范围关税战提出的新工具，并将成为其第二任期关税政策的重要组成部分。该政策反映了特朗普政府“美国优先”的一贯立场，是其单边保护主义路线的延续与升级，同时，它重新定义了WTO框架下的贸易互惠概念，势必将深刻改变现有多边贸易秩序。“对等关税”的实施标志着美国贸易政策从“单边加税”转向“系统性重构全球关税体系”，从多边框架转向双边或区域框架，其根本目的，是借此重构国际贸易体系，以美国为中心重新制定国际贸易规则。

所谓“对等关税”指的是美国针对其进口商品，按照贸易伙伴对美国出口商品所征收的税率来征收相同税率的关税。根据2019年的研究报告，在132个国家的60多万个产品系列中，美国2/3以上的产品比其他国家面临更高的关税。因此，特朗普政府将优先研究对美贸易顺差最大、关税税率最高国家的关税措施和其他贸易壁垒。

特朗普“对等关税”策略主要包含几个重点：

其一，税率对等。

据WTO统计，2023年美国的加权平均关税水平为2.2%，日本为1.9%，欧盟为2.7%，中国为3%，加拿大为3.4%，墨西哥为3.9%，越南为5.1%，巴西为6.7%，韩国为8.4%，印度则为12%。这是特朗普政府寻求所谓关税对等的原因。

其二，进出口额对等。

美国政府多次强调，将从对美贸易顺差大的经济体入手展开调查。2024年，中国大陆、欧盟、墨西哥、越南、中国台湾、日本、韩国、加拿大、印度等对美顺差额均排前列，其中前五个国家和地区对美贸易顺差约占总额的3/4。美国政府实施这一政策的目的在于缩小对外贸易逆差，针对这些国家将采取额外关税措施。

其三，非关税政策对等。

特朗普政府认为，增值税作为一种对最终消费征收的税，与关税类似，其他国家和地区的高额增值税对美国不公平。因此，不对等的增值税可能被纳入“对等关税”政策范畴。2023年，欧盟27国的平均标准增值税税率为21.5%，其中卢森堡为16%，匈牙利为27%。全球有175个国家或地区有增值税制度，而美国在联邦层面没有统一的增值税，在州级层面则有税率不等（最高可达11.5%）的销售税。此外，还涉及欧洲数字服务税等问题。

目前，特朗普政府还未立即全面实施“对等关税”，这也意味着可能给贸易谈判留出窗口。也有消息称，印度、日本和澳大利亚正在为达成潜在的贸易协议做准备。从未来走向看，特朗普政府是利用“对等关税”策略大幅提高进入美国市场的壁垒，还是将其作为杠杆来迫使其他国家与美国达成重大交易，还有待观察。

美国“对等关税”政策已经点燃全球贸易战的火药桶。中国、加拿大、欧盟、澳大利亚、巴西等国迅速宣布反制措施，其他国家也在酝酿类似的行动。更糟糕的是，这种对抗正在从双边层面扩展到多边层面，甚至可能演变为全球性的经济对抗。面对特朗普政府无差别的关税政策，包括美国盟友在内的世界各国已经开始重新评估与美国的贸易关系，寻找新的贸易伙伴，这势必加速全球贸易格局的分化和重组。而另一方面，其他国家也会效仿美国采取类似的贸易保护主义措施，这将导致全球关税壁垒螺旋上升，引发全球范围内的贸易战。

“对等关税”不仅将严重放缓全球经济和贸易增长，也将导致全球贸易格局的紊乱，而更深层次的影响，是对国际经济秩序的破坏。WTO框架下的关税协调机制以及各国关税水平的差异是基于历史谈判形成的利益平衡，而美国的单边行动无疑将导致这种平衡被打破，导致全球关税协调机制严重受阻，使国际关税协调变得更趋困难。美国试图通过“对等关税”重新定义国际贸易规则，也将促使其他国家重新审视和调整自身贸易政策，从而引发国际关税体系的深刻变革。

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.