| 央视网|中国网络电视台|网站地图 |
| 客服设为首页 |
近来，中美经贸关系又出现一些杂音。一些人认为美国在对华贸易中吃了亏，还有人认为中国低估人民币以获取竞争优势，攫取贸易顺差。对此，我们更加需要倾听理性的声音，把握发展的大方向，以建设性的态度继续推动中美经贸合作健康发展。
一、中美贸易不平衡问题中的五个基本事实
中美贸易不平衡问题由来已久，原因复杂，应全面客观地理性分析。
（一）中美贸易格局是经济全球化条件下国际产业分工的结果。半个多世纪以来，在发达国家主导的经济全球化进程中，美国产业结构不断向高端制造业和现代服务业升级，陆续把传统的劳动密集型产业转移到国外。这些产业的主要承接地先是日本、韩国和中国台湾，美国由此对上述经济体产生了大量贸易逆差。中国改革开放以后，相关产业进一步转移到劳动力成本更低的中国大陆，中国从日、韩、台进口原材料和中间品，加工装配后出口到美欧发达国家。由此，中国对周边经济体逆差增加，而对美顺差扩大，但同期美对亚洲整体的逆差占其逆差总额的比重并未明显增加。以2009年为例，中国对日本、韩国和台湾的逆差总额达1471亿美元，较中国对美顺差1434亿美元还略高。跨国企业对这一贸易链条的形成发挥了主导作用，其中包括大量美资企业。在现有国际分工格局下，美国即使限制自华进口，也难以使传统制造业回流，只能转而从其他发展中国家寻求替代。
（二）美国对华逆差程度被明显高估。今年3月4日，中国商务部与美国商务部、美国贸易谈判办公室共同发布了双方关于货物贸易统计差异的研究报告。根据研究结果测算，2006年美国实际对华贸易逆差应在美官方数据基础上缩减26%。造成统计差异的主要原因，一是原产中国的货物通过其他经济体转口至美国过程中的增值部分被计算为中方顺差；二是在对美加工贸易出口中，中国企业通常只负责接单生产，不掌控设计、运输、销售等环节，美方进口报关价格高于中方出口报关价格，进而推高中方顺差。如按此推算，2009年美国实际对华贸易逆差应在美方公布数据基础上减少约600亿美元。
（三）美国对华出口管制加剧了双边贸易不平衡。美国长期实行对华出口管制，2007年还将中国单列，专门增加了包括纤维材料、数字机床、部分集成电路设备在内的47个出口管制项目。严格的管制迫使很多中国用户放弃进口美国产品，转从他国进口。近年来中国高技术产品进口快速增长，但自美进口比重从2001年的18.3%下降到2009年的7.5%，如果仍按2001年的进口比例推算，2009年美国对华出口至少损失330亿美元。据商会测算，到2020年中国仅在集成电路、机床和民用航天领域的进口需求就高达6000多亿美元，但其中恰恰有大量产品受限于美国出口管制。在美优势产品出口受限的情况下，中美贸易差额不是双方竞争力的真实反映，依此调整两国经贸政策只能造成更大的扭曲。
（四）美国长期逆差与美元作为主要国际货币地位有关。早在上世纪60年代，美国耶鲁大学的特里芬教授就提出，美元作为主要的国际货币，要满足世界各国在贸易清算、债务清偿和国际储备等方面的需要，就必须通过国际收支逆差使美元流出。随着国际贸易和投资的扩大，全球对美元的需求增多，美国的逆差就会越大，但长期逆差又威胁美元币值的稳定，威胁美元的国际货币地位。“特里芬难题”是布雷顿森林体系解体的内在原因。当前，美元也仍然面临着既要通过经常项目逆差为世界提供流动性，又要确保美元稳定的两难窘境。
（五）人民币汇率无法解决中美贸易不平衡问题。无论是理论还是实践都表明，一国本币升值对调解贸易收支的作用有限。2005-2008年，人民币对美元累计升值21.1%，同期美国贸易逆差占GDP的比重年均达到5.9%，对华逆差年均增长21.6%，是历史上规模最大、增长最快的时期。2009年人民币对美元汇率保持稳定，而美国贸易逆差占GDP的比重从2008年的5.7%降至3.5%，对华逆差下降16.1%。上世纪七、八十年代，美国也曾因货币问题向德国、日本施压，迫使两国的货币大幅升值，但到2008年，美国对德国仍然逆差429亿美元，对日本逆差726亿美元。由此可见，贸易流向的决定性因素是市场供求关系，而非汇率。
二、中美经贸合作的总体利益关系基本平衡
中美经贸合作不仅给中国，也给美国带来巨大收益。简单地把中国在货物贸易中的顺差解读为中国受益，美国吃亏，是非常片面的。
（一）中国出口产品，惠及美国民众。中国对美国的出口大幅提高了美国消费者和生产者的福利。美国自华进口以日用消费品为主，纺织服装、鞋类、玩具、家具和箱包等占30%左右，电器及电子产品占45%左右。这些物美价廉的产品有效抑制了美国通胀，提高了美国消费者的实际购买力。按照摩根士坦利公司研究结果推算，2009年自华进口为美国消费者节省了约1000亿美元的开支。限制自华进口，只能是以美国民众尤其是低收入群体的福利为代价。
（二）顺差在中国，利益在美国。中国对美国出口中加工贸易占60%左右，2009年加工贸易形成对美顺差1176亿美元，占中美贸易顺差的82%。中国加工企业接单生产后出口，只获得少数加工费，而产品设计、运储和营销等环节的大量利润被包括美国企业在内的外国企业获得。一台在美售价约1200美元的笔记本电脑，中国加工企业仅获取35美元加工费。英国《经济学家》杂志也曾引过一个小例子，标有“中国制造”的ipod播放机的市场零售价为299美元，其中中国出口组装厂只赚取4美元的加工费，而160美元被美国设计、运销和零售企业获得。
（三）美国利益不仅在货物贸易。美国从对华投资和服务贸易中获取了巨大收益。目前在华经营的美资企业约3万家，调查显示，2008年美资企业在华实现销售收入1530多亿美元，出口750多亿美元，利润总额近80亿美元。中国美国商会《2009年美国企业在中国白皮书》表明，2008年74%的美国在华企业实现盈利，81%的企业对未来5年在华业务发展前景表示乐观。在服务贸易领域，美国长期保持对华顺差，近5年年均增长35%。美国会计、银行、保险、证券等服务贸易企业在华均有良好的经营业绩。目前，中美关于服务贸易尚无全面的统计数字，但初步估算中方逆差在130-150亿美元之间。
买卖是交易双方根据市场规律自主作出的理性决定，在中美贸易持续快速发展的事实面前，中美经贸关系利益严重失衡的论断显然不符合逻辑。
三、建设性地推动中美经贸关系健康发展
胡锦涛主席和奥巴马总统提出中美要建设21世纪积极合作全面的伙伴关系。去年奥巴马总统访华时，中美双方在《联合声明》中提出要共同努力促进更加可持续和平衡的贸易与增长，并共同致力于反对各种形式的保护主义。我们应当认真落实这些共识，避免中美经贸合作遭遇不必要的伤害。
一是要坚持对话与合作，妥善化解分歧。中美经贸合作规模巨大，出现一些不同意见不足为奇。中美在经贸问题上有畅通的沟通渠道，特别是已经建立了中美战略与经济对话、中美商贸联委会等重要机制，我们可以充分利用这些平台就各种问题进行开诚布公的讨论。如果一方因为国内政治需要向对方施加压力，动辄以贸易制裁相威胁，显然无助于问题的解决。
二是要采取建设的积极行动，有效解决问题。中方并不回避中美贸易中美方逆差的问题，也在加快自身经济结构的调整。中国在应对危机的一揽子计划中，增加投资，刺激消费，扩大进口，为世界经济的复苏做出了重要贡献。2009年中国贸易顺差锐减1000亿美元，澳大利亚、新西兰、巴西、南非等不少国家对华出口仍然增长20%以上，中国一举首次成为日本、澳大利亚、巴西、南非的第一大出口市场。2009年，美国出口总体下降了17%，对华出口却基本持平。2010年1-2月，中国的贸易顺差继续大幅减少50%，预计3月份甚至将出现贸易逆差。据美方统计，美国今年1月出口增长18.2%，但对华出口增长了64.9%。毫无疑问，中国将继续实行进口促进政策，也要求出口国不对中国实行歧视性的出口管制政策，共同为世界经济增长提供动力。解决中美贸易不平衡问题，消极打压中国的出口于事无补，我们愿意与美方共同采取行动，开辟新的合作领域，支持美国企业扩大对华出口，为包括美资企业在内的在华外资企业创造更加公平优良的投资环境，也希望美方能够以开放的精神维护中美经贸合作的健康发展。
三是共同致力于全球贸易体制的建设与完善。开放的贸易和投资对中美两国经济和全球经济具有不言而喻的重要性。建设更加完善的多边贸易体制，既是建立合理的国际经济秩序的客观要求，也是促进全球经济平衡发展的重要途径。多哈回合谈判历时八年多，已取得难能可贵的成果，我们应当在现有成果的基础上，拿出更大的诚意和决心，推动商品、资本在国际间有规则地自由流动，提高全球经济的协调与治理水平。
中美经贸关系是中美关系的重要基础。我们始终认为，两国和则两利、斗则俱伤，对话比对抗好，合作比遏制好，伙伴比对手好。相信中美经贸合作一定能排除各种干扰，继续沿着互利共赢的正确方向不断前进。
Constructively Advancing China-US Trade and Economic Relations on a Healthy Track
Minister of Commerce, Chen Deming
March 28th, 2010
Trade and economic relations between China and the United States have developed rapidly since the establishment of the bilateral diplomatic ties. Two-way trade in goods amounted to nearly USD 300 billion in 2009, a 118-fold increase over 1979 when the two countries entered into diplomatic relations. American businesses have invested cumulatively USD 62.2 billion in China. Although it has not always been a smooth sail, no twists or turns have really held back the advance of the bilateral commercial and trade relationship. This is evidence enough to show that cooperation fits the fundamental interests of the two countries' people and hence has strong vitality, and the keynote of China-US economic and trade relations has been and will always be cooperation based on mutual benefit and for win-win results.
However, some jarring notes have been heard recently. Some believe that the US is losing in its trade with China while some other hold the opinion that China undervalues its currency (RMB) to get a competitive advantage and trade surplus. Given all this, we have more reasons to listen to rational opinions, steer and carry forward, in a constructive way, China-US economic and trade relations on the right track.
I. Five facts about the China-US trade imbalance
Trade imbalance has been an age-old issue between China and the US. It is caused by complicated reasons and therefore should be approached in a comprehensive, objective, and rational manner.
(I) Current state of China-US trade is the result of international division of labor against the backdrop of globalization. For over half a century, globalization led by developed countries has concurred with the continued sophistication of US industries toward high-end manufacturing and modern services while traditional, labor-intensive industries have gradually migrated offshore, first to Japan, Korea and Taiwan with which the US began to run huge trade deficits. After China's reform and opening-up, these industries were then shifted to the mainland where labor costs were even lower. China imported raw materials and semi-finished goods from Japan, Korea and Taiwan, and after processing and assembling, exported the finished goods to developed countries in America and Europe. As a result, China's deficits with neighboring economies grew concurrent with its surplus with the US. However in the same period, Asia's share in total US trade deficit did not rise significantly. For instance, in 2009 China's deficit with Japan, Korea and Taiwan combined was USD 147.1 billion, a figure even larger than its USD 143.4 billion surplus with the US. Transnational corporations including American ones play a leading role in shaping this trade chain. Given the present international division of labor, traditional manufacturing industries would hardly return to the US even if imports from China were restricted, and the US would have to turn to other developing countries for import replacement.
(II) US trade deficit with China is overestimated. The Ministry of Commerce of China and the US Department of Commerce and the US Trade Representative Office released on March 4th a study report on statistical divergence in trade in goods. The report finds that the actual US trade deficit with China for 2006 should be 26% lower than the official US figure. Reasons for the statistical difference are: a) markups on goods of Chinese origin transiting via other economies are counted as China's surplus; and b) in processing trade, Chinese companies normally produce by order and have little control over design, transport, sales and other activities. The import value of goods declared at US customs being higher than the export value declared at Chinese customs further inflates the surplus figure. Following this methodology, the actual US deficit with China for 2009 should be about USD 60 billion less than the official US figure.
(III) Export control against China exacerbates the trade imbalance. The US has practiced export control policy against China for many years. In 2007 it even singled China out and added to the control list another 47 items such as fiber materials, numerically controlled machine tools and certain integrated circuits. Rigid control has forced many Chinese users away from the US and to buy from others. China's hi-tech import increased rapidly in recent years, but US share dropped from 18.3% in 2001 to 7.5% in 2009. If the share in 2001 is used as a benchmark, US companies had lost at least USD 33 billion worth of export opportunities in 2009. According to relevant Chinese chambers of commerce, by 2020 China's import demand on integrated circuits, machine tools and civil avionics alone will reach over USD 600 billion. But many of these products are subject to US export control. Therefore the trade imbalance does not reflect the true competitiveness of the two countries because competitive US products cannot be freely exported to China, and any adjustment of trade policy based on this fallacy of trade imbalance will only lead to greater distortion.
(IV) US long-running deficit has to do with the dollar being a global reserve currency. In 1960, Professor Robert Triffin from Yale University pointed out that the dollar, as the global reserve currency, must flow out of the US through a balance-of-payment deficit in order to satisfy all countries' needs for trade settlement, debt repayment and international reserves. But as international trade and investment grows, the demand on the dollar will increase, pushing up US trade deficit, which in the long run will threaten dollar stability as well as its role as the global reserve currency. The Triffin Dilemma is the intrinsic cause of the collapse of the Bretton Woods system. Today the US is still caught between generating liquidity for the rest of the world through current-account deficits and maintaining the stability of it currency.
(V) RMB appreciation cannot redress the trade imbalance. It has been proved both in theory and practice that the appreciation of a nation's currency provides little help for improving balance of payments. From 2005 to 2008, RMB appreciated by 21.1% against the US dollar whereas US trade deficit accounted for 5.9% of its GDP and its trade deficit with China soared by 21.6% on annual average, the biggest and fastest increase ever. In 2009, the RMB exchange rate against the US dollar was basically stable whereas the share of trade deficit in US GDP decreased to 3.5% from 5.7% in 2008 and the deficit with China down by 16.1%. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, on similar currency issues the US had pressured Germany and Japan into appreciating their currencies significantly. But by 2008, the US still ran a trade deficit of USD 42.9-billion with Germany and USD 72.6-billion with Japan. Obviously trade flow is determined by supply and demand instead of the exchange rate.
II. China's and the US' gains from bilateral trade and economic relations are roughly balanced.
Trade and economic cooperation has generated great benefits not only for China but also for the US. One would be looking narrowly at the whole trade story by equating China's trade-in-goods surplus with China winning and the US losing.
(I) Chinese exports benefit American people. China's exports to the US have substantially improved the welfare of American consumers and producers. The bulk of US imports from China are consumer goods, with textiles and garments, footwear, toys, furniture, bags and cases taking up 30% and appliances and electronics 45%. These good-value-for-money goods have served as an effective damper on inflation in the US and bolstered the real purchasing power of American consumers. According to a research by Morgan Stanley, imports from China saved American consumers about USD 100 billion in 2009. Restrictions on imports from China would have to come at the cost of reduced welfare on the part of American people, especially the low-income population.
(II) China gets the surplus yet the US gets the real gains. Processing trade represents 60% of Chinese exports to the US. In 2009, processing trade accounted for USD 117.6 billion or 82% of China's surplus with the US. Chinese processing firms take orders, produce goods and export for a meager processing fee, whereas massive profits are reaped by foreign firms including US firms in such areas as product designing, transportation, warehousing, and marketing. For a laptop sold for 1,200 dollars in the US, only 35 dollars goes to the Chinese processing firm. There was another example in the Economist: an iPod carrying the “Made in China” label is sold for 299 dollars, but the Chinese assembling plant only gets paid 4 dollars while some 160 dollars go to US companies doing the designing, shipping, marketing and retailing.
(III) US gains go beyond trade in goods. The US has made huge profits on their investments in and services trade with China. Currently, some 30,000 American-funded companies operate in China. The results of a survey suggest American-funded companies reported over USD 153 billion of sales revenues, USD 75 billion of exports and nearly USD 8 billion of profits in 2008. According to American Chamber of Commerce in China's 2009 White Paper on American Business in China, about 74% of American businesses in China made profits in 2008 and 81% were optimistic about their business outlook in China for the next five years. In services, the US has held China in deficit for many years and its surplus with China has been growing by an annual rate of 35% in the past five years. US accounting firms, banks, insurance firms, securities firms and other service-providers are all doing well in China. In the absence of complete statistics on China-US trade in services, rough estimates suggest China's deficit to range between USD 13 billion and 15 billion.
A deal is done when the parties on both ends make an informed decision based on the laws of market. Against the true, compelling story of a robust and growing China-US trade, no rhetoric about a serious imbalance of China-US trade and commercial interests could stand to reason.
III. Constructively advancing China-US trade and economic relations on the right track
President Hu Jintao and President Obama proposed a positive, cooperative and comprehensive partnership for China-US relations in the 21st century. During President Obama's visit to China last year, both sides committed through a Joint Statement to promoting more sustainable and balanced trade and growth and to resisting protectionism in all its manifestations. We should faithfully honor these shared commitments and avoid doing undesirable harm to China-US trade and economic cooperation.
First, dialogue and cooperation should be persisted to appropriately resolve disputes. Given the massive scale of bilateral trade and economic cooperation, it is only natural to have divergent views. There are open avenues of communication between the two countries on trade issues, most prominently the Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) and the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT). We could fully leverage these forums to have candid discussions. It does not help if one side, driven by its political agenda at home, puts pressure on the other with unwarranted threats of trade sanctions.
Second, a constructive course of actions should be pursued to effectively address problems. China is not turning away from the US trade deficit issue. It is now accelerating economic restructuring. In its stimulus program to fight the crisis, China is increasing investment, stimulating consumption and expanding imports, which has contributed significantly to world economic recovery. In 2009, China's trade surplus plunged by USD 100 billion. Exports from countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Brazil and South Africa are still growing by over 20%. China, for the first time, has become the top export destination for Japan, Australia, Brazil and South Africa. In 2009, US exports as a whole dropped by 17% but its exports to China were on par with last year. In the first two months of 2010, China's trade surplus further dipped by 50%, so much as to make an overall deficit in March a real possibility. By US count, US exports were up 18.2% in January this year but its China-bound exports grew by 64.9%. Without doubt, China will move forward with import promotion while dissuading exporting nations from keeping discriminatory export controls so as to collectively generate steam for world economic growth. Suppressing Chinese exports provides no relief for redressing the bilateral trade imbalance. We are willing to take concerted efforts with the US to extend our cooperation into new areas, facilitate more exports by American businesses to China, level and improve the playing field for American and other foreign-invested enterprises in China. We look to the US for an open spirit in protecting the health and growth of China-US trade and economic cooperation.
Third, common efforts should be aimed at building and perfecting the global trading system. Open trade and investment holds unequivocal significance for the economies of China, the US and beyond. Building a more sensible multilateral trading system is necessitated by the enforcement of a rational international economic order and constitutes an important means to balanced economic growth. The Doha round has yielded much needed progress after 8 years of negotiations, on which basis we should show greater sincerity and determination to facilitate the free, orderly movement of goods and capital across the world and introduce greater harmony and discipline into the world economy.
The China-US trade and commercial relationship is a great cornerstone of China-US relations. We always believe a peaceful China-US relationship makes both countries winners while a confrontational one both losers. It is better to have dialogue than confrontation, cooperation than containment, and partnership than rivalry. I have confidence that China-US trade and economic cooperation will rise above the noises and stay on the right course of win-win and mutual benefits.
中国中央电视台 中国网络电视台 版权所有
违法和不良信息举报电话:010-88047123 京ICP证060535号 京网文【2014】0383-083号
网上传播视听节目许可证号 0102004 新出网证（京）字098号 中国互联网视听节目服务自律公约
意见反馈
顶
踩
收藏
MSN或QQ好友
贴到博客或论坛
转发邮件
